The Surprising Truth About Protein & Meat Alternatives | Laura Hackl (#20)
Episode Summary
Protein is essential for human health, but not all sources are created equal. What makes animal-based protein different from plant-based alternatives? Are plant-based meat substitutes truly healthier and more sustainable? And as the world faces growing food challenges, what role will alternative proteins—like lab-grown meat and insect-based protein—play in our future?
In this episode, I sit down with Laura Hackl, a leading expert in protein science, nutrition, and sustainability. Laura has worked across global nutrition initiatives, from food security programs to innovative protein solutions. She was a key team member in the XPrize Feed the Next Billion competition, where her team developed ProFillet, a scalable, plant-based fish fillet substitute designed to be both nutritious and sustainable.
Expect to learn how protein quality differs across sources, why alternative proteins are designed to mimic real meat, and the challenges of scaling sustainable food solutions. Laura also shares insights into the gaps in nutrition science, how research often fails to translate into real-world applications, and where the future of protein is headed—including lab-grown meat and insect-based options.
Meet Laura Hackl
Laura Hackl is a researcher and consultant specializing in protein science, nutrition, and sustainability. She holds a PhD in Health Sciences and Technology from ETH Zurich, where her research focused on human mineral absorption in fortified foods. She has worked as a Research Advisor for USAID Advancing Nutrition and as a consultant for the International Atomic Energy Agency, designing studies on nutrient absorption and meal fortification.
Laura was part of the XPrize Feed the Next Billion competition, where her team developed ProFillet, a plant-based fish fillet substitute aimed at providing a scalable, sustainable protein source. Her work focuses on bridging the gap between research and real-world nutrition solutions, particularly in alternative proteins and global food security.
Full Transcript
E20. Laura Hackl Interview_V2
Mike: [00:00:00] Hey everyone, my guest today is Laura Hackle, a leading expert in protein science, nutrition, and sustainability. Laura has a PhD in health sciences and technology from ETH. has worked as a research advisor for the USAID Advancing Nutrition and as a consultant for the International Atomic Energy Agency, where she designed studies to assess nutrient absorption and improve the quality of fortified meals. Her career spans global initiatives focusing on tackling food insecurity, enhancing diet quality and driving innovation in nutrition and alternative proteins.
What makes protein from animal sources so different from plant based alternatives? Why is it important for alternative proteins to mimic the look, taste, and smell of meat?
And given that many plant based meat alternatives are highly processed, Are we fully understanding their health and environmental impacts? In this episode, Laura and I [00:01:00] dive into the science of protein, breaking down the differences between animal and plant based proteins, and exploring why alternative proteins are becoming increasingly important.
We discuss her work at ProFillet, where she served as a nutrition specialist on a team developing a fish fillet substitute and the complexities involving mimicking meat using plants. We also touch on broader topics, including the gap in nutritional science and the disconnect between research and real world applications and the future of alternative proteins from lab grown meat to insect burgers.
Now, here is my conversation with Laura Hackle.
So, Laura, how do you define what you do?
Laura: That is a great question. my trajectory is not super straightforward in that. I’m a pharmacist by training, but I was always interested in the kind of global health space before I knew that [00:02:00] this was a topic you could study, for example. So during my pharmacy studies at the end of the studies, I started to look for other opportunities and which is how I landed in the kind of nutrition sciences where I did a PhD and that was, uh, on nutrition science and food technology side of things.
So this is where my passion lies in trying to provide better nutrition to those who otherwise wouldn’t have access, I would say.
Mike: So, when you say things like global health, where specifically are you talking about?
Laura: I did some work in Ghana where I did a research study. I also did a study in India where I spent quite a bit of time to kind of set up [00:03:00] the study infrastructure and recruit personnel and try to work with the kind of local collaborators to I really set up the research facilities and I also did some work with USAID Advanced Nutrition. That was mainly in East Africa, so I traveled to. Kenya and Tanzania
Mike: if we take one of these, um, places as an example, say Ghana, at the end of an experience like that, how does your view on what it takes to really do good research change from when you started to when you finished?
Laura: Well, it changed a lot specifically in Ghana because that was the first time I actually did research in a, let’s say, resource limited [00:04:00] setting.
So basically, my area of work was on food fortification and, and it just means that you add nutrients to a specific, uh, food.
In my case, it was rice, and that was what my, my whole research was about. So basically what we have done in Switzerland was to, prepare the rice, add some sauce so that it would be palatable and then participants would eat it. Um, but apparently in Ghana, it’s not so much in their culture that you would already mix the rice and the sauce. So, they would have to mix it themselves. But, it was school aged children and we had quite small bowls, and the kind of tricky part when you work with stable isotopes, it’s a really precise method, so you cannot lose any food because you, it would basically, make the, all the results invalid. [00:05:00] So we, we needed to make sure that, you know, you don’t lose a kernel of rice from the portion. And. My first response was like, No, we can’t do that. It’s not possible. And, um, we made it work, with great support. But this also, you know, showed me in a way that, being culturally sensitive and making sure that, you listen to those who actually know better. It’s really important.
Mike: When you, uh, fortifying rice and you’re giving it to, different groups of people to, measure the outcome. How are you measuring the outcome? What is, what, what does the result look like?
Laura: so basically, you give the food with the stable isotope that’s completely safe, uh, and then two weeks later you draw blood. [00:06:00] And then you compare the composition of the isotopes in the blood before and after. So, for example, um, your composition of iron isotopes in the blood is the same as basically everyone else’s. someone who participated in the study, um, has a slightly different composition. And this, uh, because iron is recycled so well in the body, it’s, um, this is kind of valid for a long time.
Mike: And so you do these tests, um, in very particular amounts so that you, you know, you can’t waste a single grain of rice and so it’s very measured. How does that translate though into the real world?
They’re not going to be eating rice in a very controlled environment. So how does research like this translate to real world application?
Laura: Yes, that, that’s a great question. I think [00:07:00] in this area of research, it’s, I think, more applied than in other, in other areas. Of course, it’s never going to be You know, they will never consume the food like they do in a research environment, that is clear. So what we make sure is when we give the rice, for example, is that we give it without too many, uh, what we call antinutrients. there are, especially in, a lot of plant based foods, there are antinutrients that would actually prevent the iron from being absorbed in the body. Uh, and this is basically a big issue, especially in low resource settings where they eat a lot of legumes and, and, other plant based sources that have, um, a high amount of antinutrients,
uh, in terms of this type of [00:08:00] research with the rice the idea is to just understand whether this improves the iron absorption. In this case, the study, the sample size. So basically the, the number of participants was very little, because it’s so precise, we can afford having a very low number. There are other, types of studies where you would require a higher number.
Mike: Now I wanted to ask you about, anti nutrients I hadn’t heard this term before, but I guess if there are anti nutrients in specific foods, that would mean that Say, we have two, um, hypothetical types of food.
They both have the same measure of a particular, um, level of iron or whatever it is that we’re measuring. But one of them has anti nutrients. Does that mean that one of them? Bioavailability is greater than the other one and therefore one of them will get more of that nutrient than the other one because of this additional [00:09:00] factor.
Laura: Um, so if there are ant nutrients present, then you would have a lower. Um, a lower absorption, so you, you would receive less iron that’s bioavailable to you.
Mike: Mm hmm.
Laura: And, you know, like, for example, if you have, um, some sort of porridge that has a lot of, um, the antinutrient, one of the most prevalent ones is phytic acid. And that’s basically really the, um, the biggest contender when it comes to antinutrient. Um, if you, for example, soak it overnight. Then the phytic acid degrades. So, therefore, you could, um, by just soaking it overnight, you could remove some of the phytic acid. But the issue is, you know, like, you can. Do a lot of research on that.
And I mean, there’s a ton of research, uh, that [00:10:00] has been done on, on this, uh, topic and on, on fighting as in general, but the issue is always to, not just having published somewhere, uh, in a fancy journal, but to actually bring this information to the people and then to have them. actually change maybe their, their way of preparing those things.
So there’s often this discrepancy between what we know and what’s evidence and, you know, like what has been proven, but then also how, how do we make sure that it reaches those populations who could benefit from it? And how can we help them to maybe have some small changes to their behaviors that would Probably create a very positive impact on them.
Mike: You said porridge. It got me thinking as an example. One thing I was really looking at [00:11:00] and I wasted a whole probably Saturday trying to figure this out was whether oats are good or bad because on the packet, it says it’s great.
But if you, if you start reading research, some say good, some say bad, all have their list of reasons. And this really seems to be for everything, especially when it comes to meat . Why do you think that it is so complicated to say whether things are generally good or bad?
Laura: That’s a great question. I think there are different reasons. One is that everyone reacts differently. You know, there are a lot of people who okay, they can’t have. Gluten for some reason or another, some of those are actually celiac. So they actually get sick from.
eating anything that contains gluten and that can be very severe, even if [00:12:00] there are small traces in it. And then, you know, some people, they may not have a kind of a clinical diagnosis of, uh, celiac disease, but they still, uh, don’t support it so well, or they don’t like it, or, you know, there may be other reasons.
And then I think there’s often this kind of imbalance between personal beliefs. Um, proven research and. In a way, opinions, um, when it comes, for example, to ultra processed foods that have been in the media a lot, there’s a lot of, uh, in a way, demonization happening when it comes to ultra processed foods.
But then when you look into the actual research, uh, it’s often. Not so straightforward because, um, my understanding is that it [00:13:00] really depends on the type of, uh, ultra processed food. Um, and that’s just not a lot of research on a different kinds. So if you say you have. If you have ultra processed red meat, I think there, there is quite some evidence showing that it’s not so healthy.
But if you have, for example, whole grain bread that has been ultra processed, I don’t think there is much evidence that it is harmful. And again, it also depends on, you know, how much of a specific food you would consume.
Mike: Hmm.
Laura: You know, I think your question is very much to the point, but then it’s also equally difficult to answer. There’s a lot of things we don’t know, and I often find it problematic that, there’s often a kind of shyness to admit that we don’t know certain things. [00:14:00] And there’s more research needed because. If there would be one perfect answer of what you should eat, I’m sure many people would love to just eat the right thing all the time, but there is this, let’s say medical side to it, there’s the personal side. And then there’s also culture, right there. There is a big. Um, cultural component in, you know, I, I remember when I came to Switzerland, we, we had a fondue and I, um, it was organized by my lab and I suggested to bring a salad and people almost got offended. But for me, you know, I, I didn’t, I wasn’t really familiar with the concept of uh, fondue and that’s
Mike: Kilo of cheese and bread.
Laura: Yeah, so I think it’s, you know, [00:15:00] the, it’s something that sounds funny, but it is so important to consider what’s in your culture. My, my partner is American. And I always thought that I, I knew a lot about, American stereotypes just, you know, because I was exposed to a lot of media and, and, um, it’s just a very true.
In a way prevalent culture, but then you learn kind of small things and, and understand that, we are all very different and where we come from really defines us and maybe defines also what we like and not like, or, or what we can or cannot support physically.
Mike: that’s true. And we also have cognitive dissonance. So when, when you have been doing something your whole life, eating, say you’ve been [00:16:00] drinking milk your whole life and you love it, and then one day you get told, now this is actually really bad for you. There’s that physical uncomfortable feeling that you get.
When you’ve been told something different to your belief, and it’s very easy to, I guess, ignore it. Especially when it seems the evidence never seems to be conclusive, I guess, when it comes to nutrition anyway.
Laura: Yes, and I mean, that’s, you know, that’s definitely because if you look at the studies, like, you have different study designs, right? So if you have an epidemiological study, um, You have just big amounts of data and then you try to find some associations between, one big data source and, and cross referencing with it with, uh, other pieces of the, of evidence from the same pool, but then there’s a [00:17:00] lot of information that you don’t have, right? So if you have a big cohort and, um, and you find that, consumption of red meat is associated with, heart disease, there are probably still a lot of people who consume that red meat and don’t have anything, but you don’t have the granularity of the data to understand, What did they do differently than than their peers?
Mike: I also, I was reading into red meat and it seems extremely complicated because there’s always other factors which aren’t necessarily measured with the research and I think red meat was something along the lines of, if you are a large consumer of red meat versus someone who’s vegetarian, the chances of you Having poor dietary choices outside of red meat are much higher than if you’re consciously already a vegetarian anyway So that there’s other things [00:18:00] where you probably eat worse food outside of that particular study what a mess to have to uh, to have to have findings on
Laura: Yes, and you know, that’s, um, that’s definitely like a shortcoming off research and also maybe something that could be improved going forward because nowadays it’s much easier. I think to collect more data and to maybe provide more context for, for better, for worse, you can track a lot that, you weren’t able to one, one example, especially when it comes to nutrition research is dietary calls. So this is basically one of the cornerstones of, of nutrition research is asking participants what they ate. And there are different ways to do it. You can do a 24 hour recall where you ask, okay, what did you eat [00:19:00] in the last 24 hours? And then, you know, like I could tell you I had cereal in the morning and then for lunch I had a salad and, and, you know, then I had a cake and something.
And then as a researcher, you would ask, okay, anything else? Like, can, can we go over it again? And then like, you would basically reiterate just to make sure that you captured everything. That is, in a way something that’s somewhat accurate, but it really, really, really depends on who is the participant.
Well, you know, did they forget something? Did they, you know, eat an additional cake but were embarrassed so they don’t want to tell you? Um, was there something special? Did they, you know, did they eat the whole portion? Did they finish it? If you ask, you know, if you make. Pasta, for example, one portion for you may look [00:20:00] different than one portion for me.
So there’s so much conscious and unconscious bias in this type of research. So now, you know, with the, with things. Being more digital and, and there are definitely, I would say, better ways or more accurate ways, maybe to track. Um, but most of the tools I think are not there yet because there are some tools, you know, where you can take a picture and then it tells you what’s. what food is in the picture, what’s the composition, but I think, um, those tools are not yet granular enough to actually track everything.
Mike: As you’re talking about what’s required to gather the the the data from from people about what they’re eating and I think if you [00:21:00] Doing a study on the correlation between heart disease and processed red meat, I would imagine that, that’s a really long study, that’s not a week, that’s months and months or years if you want to actually detect a correlation.
So would you have to do this for really, really long periods of time?
Laura: It really depends on what your research question
Mike: Mm.
Laura: And then, depending on what you want to find, you, you can, you have to calculate the sample size. So you would look into. What is the outcome you’re measuring and what is the kind of effect that you’re anticipating, which you would probably use some prior data that are, you know, close enough or closest enough to what you’re measuring. And then you have a certain number, and then you would probably account for some attrition, which would depend on, again, what, what you’re exactly measuring, because if you have, [00:22:00] I mean, what in the studies that I did, uh, on iron absorption, it was a relatively simple protocol, but people had to come back every other week, uh, for six weeks, and that’s, You know, that’s kind of, or for eight weeks, even that’s kind of difficult to do just because, you know, I don’t know, maybe in six weeks, you know, I’m sick, or I had a test and I can’t come.
And then I had another study on zinc absorption. Where in addition to having to come every other week, they also had to bring in a urine sample, I think, you know, six times on different days. So it’s just like a lot of logistics, which, you know, then it also is convenient if you have, for example, students being your participants because, um, they have to go to [00:23:00] university.
They have a relatively fixed schedule and can probably accommodate. But then again, you have a student population, and that may not be generalizable to. You know, other, other, uh, people even at the same age.
Mike: And how does the, from your experience, how does the bias of the particular researcher or research group play into this? Because I can imagine if you are doing a study, there would be a hope to find it lean one way over the other way because this leads to more money or this leads to a better headline and therefore more career progression.
Do you think, I’ve read this before, but I’d be curious as a researcher to get your take on that.
Laura: So I don’t, I, I don’t think, um, any of these biases are malintended. I believe that as a researcher, you. are aware that you have a responsibility to generate knowledge, uh, and generate knowledge in the best and most [00:24:00] accurate way possible. However, there is maybe some sort of disconnect in what can or cannot get funded.
So if you, if you work in research and depending on how your, um, work and your contract is set up, uh, you, you would have to Get funding to do certain types of work. Um, and the funding can, you know, be from, uh, the government or from industry or, you know, from different, um, different places. And then it really depends on what is of interest to whoever funds your study.
So if you have a really great idea and you think it’s really important. But the funding body does not agree, then you won’t get the money. Then you cannot do it. [00:25:00] So, in a way, it’s often an in between what would be really interesting from a scientific point of view to further the knowledge, cross reference with.
Um, what the funding agency considers is relevant because, you know, in a way, only because it’s interesting scientifically also doesn’t mean that it would have the most impact, on individuals. There’s a lot of, interest in Sustainability research, for example, and especially in this area, the research funding is limited.
So, you know, you could, for example, study, The behavior of polar bears, in different, temperatures, or you could study the behavior of [00:26:00] birds in the tropical forest. So it’s, it’s just, there’s so many different questions that would be important and relevant, but I think there’s just not enough resources to answer them all.
So, Someone has to prioritize and make a decision and that often means that, some research that you as a researcher find most pressing is not getting addressed.
Mike: I know one of the areas of particular interest for you is alternative protein sources. And I also know that you have been involved in XPRIZE Feed the Next Billion. Can you explain to me what that is exactly and what your role was?
Laura: Yes, sure, so XPrize 15xBillion was, um, Uh, competition, and the goal was to create, either alternative chicken or, alternative seafood that [00:27:00] matches the kind of animal origin in terms of, sensory aspects and nutritional composition. And together with my, colleagues from our startup ProFillet, we made it to the finals.
Mike: You’re essentially saying, for people here in Switzerland, uh, something similar to say planted. So something that looks and feel, or in your case fish, but I mean, looks and feels like meat, but is actually plant based.
Laura: Yes, and I think the, the biggest challenge that, um, we, and I think also other teams faced was that the nutritional composition, , had to be, Basically matching the animal origin, which, for example, in the, in the case of protein is very difficult to do, because the more protein you try to add [00:28:00] to, a plant based alternative, it makes the product quite dry. So balancing the nutritional and sensory aspect is, is very difficult.
Mike: Why does it need to be nutritionally the same? I mean, could you make it nutritionally different, but better? Because I would imagine that for fish or chicken, they’re very healthy for you in general, but I’m sure they’re not perfect.
Laura: Yes. I mean, ideally, ideally, if you could make it better, uh, that would be, um, preferred, but it is already really difficult to meet the nutritional aspect. So, I think. At this moment, there are very few to no, uh, products that meet the [00:29:00] protein, contents of their conventional counterparts.
Mike: So. The most difficult part then is actually the protein, not the texture, not the flavor, not the other things, actually the protein count is the most challenging thing.
Laura: It’s all of the above. So you have this, cogwheel where everything has to feed into each other. And this is, this is really difficult. So let’s say if you prioritize, the sensory aspects of taste and texture, you can do it, but then probably the protein would have to be lower.
If you prioritize the protein, then you have to be quite creative to, get the taste and texture right. And this is something that we are still working on fine tuning. I think we, we got very far, especially, you know, we have, a lot of different [00:30:00] samples from different generations that we’ve created, , along the journey.
And you can. You tell that, you know, in the beginning. It didn’t taste great or the texture wasn’t great. And now we’re trying to fine tune it so that all of the different aspects are met. But that, you know, also shows how, how difficult it is to create something, that is good enough to actually tell it as a product.
Mike: So this would be a cooked fillet of fish. That’s what you’re trying to achieve with plants.
Laura: Yes,
Mike: What’s, What’s, the, what are, what are the ingredients in a plant based piece of fish? That’s really interesting. Uh
Laura: Um, well, I can’t tell you the exact composition because, that’s, proprietary information, but basically what a lot of those products contain is different types [00:31:00] of, protein components such as, pea flour or soy flour that are very high in protein and then, you know, of course, also other, um, binders and, and stabilizers.
Mike: This goes into your previous comment around ultra processed foods, but My first thought that comes to mind often, actually, when I see plant based foods is, is it really good for you if you’ve got really processed foods which by themselves taste and feel nothing like the product in which they’re being engineered to taste like? Is there a, risk that no matter how close it is, in the lab, that it isn’t the same level of nutrition and health?
Laura: I think it really depends and it’s again, there’s a lot of things we don’t know, um, [00:32:00] is it healthy or not? It’s probably healthier than, eating. burger and fries every day. Um, is it healthier than eating a salad? No, probably not, but it, it really depends. And there is this notion that there is one, one way to, to eat or, or one diet that’s right or wrong.
I don’t think that’s the case. I think. It’s way more nuanced. Obviously you shouldn’t eat, like, sugary foods all the time. I think this is something we can agree on, yet still a lot of people eat sugary foods all the time. And, in a way, eating it once in a while is probably okay if you don’t overdo it. And then in addition to, physical [00:33:00] health, there’s also sustainability aspect. So if you say, okay, you, you don’t want to eat meat for, uh, whatever reason, including ethical reasons or cultural reasons or sustainability reason. What is. Like, how can you replace that with something else? And in, in that case, you know, an alternative protein food is probably better than not replacing the protein at all, you know?
So I think that’s a little bit, um, depending on where you stand. the answer Is I think, not, not that straightforward, unfortunately.
Mike: Is the reason that it’s important to have plant based, alternative protein sources to [00:34:00] look and feel like meat, is that because there’s an acceptance that people are never going to switch from a meat patty to a veggie patty? The only chance we’re going to roll this out successfully is if you can essentially convince them that the veggie patty is meat.
Laura: I think there’s a lot of, uh, behavioral research that still needs to be done on this. I can only tell you anecdotally from myself. So, I have been vegetarian, I think, for about 25 years. I still would like the, to have meat if it were like, I don’t want to eat animals just from my, my own personal beliefs. I still think it tastes good. And if you give me an alternative, that’s as close to meat as possible. I would prefer that over, a quinoa patty that doesn’t resemble [00:35:00] meat at all. I know from other people who’ve been vegetarian or vegan for, for, for a long time, or, you know, it depends.
They don’t like that it resembles meat. And I have a friend, he’s, he’s from India. He was never. Um, like he grew up vegetarian for him, resembling meat it doesn’t really make sense. So he doesn’t need that. I think it, it really differs for me. I would totally go for as close as possible.
Mike: It’s also difficult. And you’ll tell me if this is right or wrong, but my understanding also is Protein is less bioavailable in plant based foods compared to meat, which means that 100g of protein that’s plant based is not necessarily equal to 100g of protein meat based, so [00:36:00] overall, it is more difficult to hit those goals if you’re vegetarian.
Do you find that to be true?
Laura: There is definitely a concern when it comes to the protein quality. So for protein quantity, I think most, uh, general populations. In most parts of the world in general populations, there is often no. Uh, lack of protein in terms of quantity, but the quality of protein, so the composition of the different amino acids, that is very much an issue. Um, so if you, if you have, uh, a predominantly plant based diet, it is likely that there are some, uh, amino acids that you’re lacking.
There is, for example, if you take soy, soy, uh, has a very high protein quality, uh, [00:37:00] similar to, what animal based foods have. And there are, certain food groups in, in the kind of plant based, foods that are limited. So, for example, if you have nuts, they, they may be missing a certain, uh, uh, amino acid.
If you have grains, they may be missing a certain amino acid. So what’s important is to combine. Um, plant sources, uh, to actually the right amino acid profile and therefore protein quality.
Mike: Okay, so If we take, um, nuts and grains, for example, they might individually be missing certain amino acids, but not necessarily the same amino acids. So, if you sort of eat them together, okay, I see.
Laura: Yeah. So, I mean, the, the amino acids that [00:38:00] are, you know, often, um, kind of the main contenders are lysine and methionine that are um, basically creating this limitation.
So it’s a little bit it’s a bit
tricky.
Mike: a bit
of a nutritional education, I suppose.
Laura: Yes. And you know, like, I mean, I’ve been in this nutrition space for quite a long time. I don’t know how many years, but more than a decade. And it’s still difficult to navigate.
Mike: Hmm.
Laura: And I know from other colleagues too, who are like, well, I’m, I know a lot about, you know, iron or zinc or whatever, carbohydrates, but no one knows the whole picture because it’s just so complex.
Mike: I wanted to ask you, your take on a couple of Alternative protein sources we haven’t talked about so far which are not plant based. Have you put any time or effort [00:39:00] into understanding the potential value in insects as an alternative protein source?
Laura: Um, yes, I think it’s definitely a very interesting topic. Uh, I think also from a sustainability point of view, I think one, concern that I’ve heard about recently, and I think there is, , research being done is also on the well, being of the insects and whether farming insects like you, you would find pigs, I guess that, , ethically, , something that, that one can support. So I think there will be more research coming up in this area, but I do think from a sustainability perspective, it’s, it’s probably one solution that. that. will gain more traction in the years to come.
Mike: I was thinking about this where a consideration for being [00:40:00] vegetarian is that you don’t want to eat animals because they have their own personality and the more like the animal a human is, the more you can see a human traits in an animal, the more you connect with them.
So generally speaking, bigger animals, more intelligent animals, cows, pigs, you think, okay, the other argument you could make is. I’m better off eating cows than insects because one cow serves a lot more people than insects. So you can go to a restaurant and order shrimp and you essentially taking 25 lives to eat your meal as opposed to 1 50th of one ant.
I was thinking about that, how do you decide? What, ethically, is, valuable in terms of a life when consuming food?
Laura: Yes. And also to me, this is like one very big question because in a way, especially when, when it comes to low resource settings, I, I would [00:41:00] always eat less animal products, eat less meat, eat less eggs etc.. When it comes to low resource settings, the equation is a bit different, right?
Because, um, there are many individuals who have severe, nutrition deficiencies that may be very hard to meet, uh, with a just plant based diet. So how can we justify, uh, or can we justify telling those individuals that they shouldn’t eat animal products? And that’s, those are not very easy questions to answer for sure.
Mike: have you spent any time learning about lab grown meat? I remember being really interested in this but it was, must have been 5 or 6 years ago and it seemed very promising but I haven’t heard about it for a while and in theory it seems like almost a perfect solution if you can grow in a lab actual red meat[00:42:00] at a reasonable price, at scale.
Laura: Yes. I mean, I actually, I went to Singapore in 2023, I think, uh, and actually tried, uh, uh, cell based meat and yeah, it was, it tasted quite good. And for me, for someone who actually likes meat, I was very excited that it, that this would gain traction. I think, you know, there are some. issues that are not yet completely resolved.
It’s quite expensive in, you know, that it, it’s not yet scalable. I think this is something that probably can be overcome in the next decade or so. And then in terms of regulations, it really depends on the country. I think Europe at some point, , changed it so that you could produce it for research reasons.
So I think it’s definitely a [00:43:00] space to watch. I think given, you know, that we have a growing global population that, we will need to feed this population. I think it’s one of the, the ways to go. It’s one pillar that, will be important going forward just because, the answer to feed the growing population will not be to farm more animals, or at least this will be limited.
For me, I’m very excited about, about this. Does it have some, disadvantages in terms of nutrition health? Maybe. We don’t know. We, we would have to see but I think it’s definitely something that, is a very exciting field, but for now it’s just. It’s not so scalable.
It’s quite expensive. You need different media to actually prepare it. I’m, you know, not a [00:44:00] biochemist, so I don’t know all the details of it, but it’s not yet easy, but I think it will, it will be in the future.
Mike: Yeah, there’s also a argument against it. I mean, one reason to be vegetarian over having meat is for, for environmental reasons because of the, energy cost to raise animals. And I think the energy costs to do lab grown meat at scale is, um, at this point in time, huge, so there’s a few hurdles they need to jump over, I suppose, but I guess in principle it is something which, if they could manage it at scale, would solve a lot of problems.
Laura: Yes, I agree with that. And, one, one issue that, I’m always a bit, um, critical about as well is, if you read any paper, there’s always this sustainability part that’s being Um, highlight that and you know, when, when it comes to plant based meat or plant based milk or [00:45:00] whatever, it’s like, yeah, it’s, it’s, uh, so much more sustainable.
But then if you actually look at how sustainability is quantified or like how it is measured. There are very few, um, assessments of sustainability of plant based products.
Mike: Interesting.
Laura: one reason is because it’s very difficult to do and it, it costs money, you know, it costs resources. And, um, there’s also, some questions in terms of IP, because if you would do a thorough assessment of the sustainability, then it would have to disclose some of the, processes that you’re, uh, applying to produce the product.
Mike: This probably goes into what we talked about earlier in terms of the, study versus the practical reality and how they can be a difference between the two.
Laura: I [00:46:00] mean, you know, there, there are different aspects to it. One is it probably just, it costs a lot of energy and money to do it, but then there’s also, do you want to know something? That’s actually bad for you or your company or, or, you know, like that would give you your product a better reputation.
Probably not. For example, what we had to do for the express competition was to do actually a life cycle assessment and to do a cost, comparison. So that’s why, you know, we realized this is a lot of work. It kind of takes a lot of resources, but we have to do it. So that’s why we did it.
And, it turned out that, um, the product would be more sustainable at a certain scale. Um, but then every product would have to do a similar assessment. So if you have a lot of products or, you know, if [00:47:00] you’re a big company and you have a lot of products, it’s very expensive to do it.
If you’re a very small company. You may also be just restrained by the resources you have. And then again, if you do this kind of testing, you have to disclose everything from your production process. So that’s why it may not be so attractive to, to do it. Because if you’re a company, who pays for this?
Like you have to pay for it yourself, but does it lead to, more customers purchasing your product? Does it lead to, you having a better reputation or, you know, does it maybe harm your reputation if it, if the outcome is not as good? So I think there’s definitely a lot more to do. I’m wondering how to best incentivize, companies to actually do this, this work, because it’s very important.
We can say, yes, it’s, [00:48:00] it’s more sustainable, but then if we don’t know how much more, it’s also a bit of a,
Mike: a hard selling point if you don’t have all the answers.
Laura: Yeah.
And then similar, you know, what we talked about earlier about the protein quality. If you say, you know, soy products have, uh, equal protein quality to animal products, um, that’s great, but then does the process that you kind of, uh, the product undergo, does it change the protein quality?
Mike: And if
Laura: you know, if you use a flour versus a concentrate, like, is there, are there any Differences, um, when it comes to protein quality in the end product, I think these are also, um, questions that are still not fully answered and, uh, hopefully, uh, they will be in the future.
Mike: Now, as a [00:49:00] closing question for you, are you optimistic about the trajectory that alternative and plant based protein is on at the moment? Do you see good progress over the next 10 years?
Laura: Um, am I optimistic? You know, I try to be. There’s definitely, you know, a few years ago, I think, let’s say five years ago, there was a lot of interest in the alternative protein space, and there was a lot of funding available as well. And now it seems to have slowed down. And I think that the investment has, has declined.
I think it will come back. Uh, I think, it may not be as easy to, to start something fresh and to, to get funding for a new idea. But I think there may be fewer ideas, but hopefully better ones that will be [00:50:00] able to. survive. So I am hopeful and you know, I know I told you, um, I’ve been vegetarian for more than 25 years that like when I think of 10 years ago, soy milk was not very good. When I think of 20 years ago, it was awful. Now there are so many good and great options and, also options that have been around for a few years already. So I am hopeful, you know, that there will be good products. There will be good products that will, survive. And then, you know, there will be maybe, uh, products that won’t make it because they, they don’t meet certain criteria.
That they would need to succeed, but I try to be hopeful.
Mike: Okay, that’s good. Well, Laura, this has been an absolute pleasure. Thank you very much for your time.
Laura: Yeah, pleasure was all mine. Thank you so [00:51:00] much. And yeah, I
Mike: If people want to, um, contact you, what is the best way to do so?
Laura: Yes, please. Uh, definitely. If they want to contact me or reach out, I, uh, I think you have my email address and LinkedIn. So if you want to put those in the show notes, um, yeah, that would be, I’m always happy to chat, uh, and also get some feedback and learn more about others opinions. So.
Mike: And share stories about your cats as well, it sounds like.
Laura: Absolutely. And board
Mike: And board games. Alright, alright, thank you very much. Have a good one.
Laura: Thanks a lot. You as well. Bye bye.
