The Biased Science That Fuelled Italian Farmers’ Anti-Cultivated-Meat March

One of the loudest opponents of cultivated meat, Coldiretti rallied thousands of farmers to demand the EU assess novel foods like new drugs. It cited concerns from scientists, but half of them are members of the organisation.

It was only a week ago that thousands of farmers from across Italy marched the city of Parma with yellow and blue flags to demand an overhaul of European food safety regulations, specifically against cultivated meat and precision-fermented foods.

The procession was organised by Coldiretti, Italy’s leading farmers’ association, which has been a key voice in lobbying for anti-cultivated-meat legislation in the country. The group’s 2022 petition, signed by nearly half a million people and 3,000 local governments, called on policymakers to ban “synthetically produced food” and eventually led to Italy’s world-first ban on cultivated meat a year later.

During the march, Coldiretti – led by its President Ettore Prandini and its General Secretary Vincenzo Gesmundo – rallied against the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to “shed light” on the safety assessments around novel foods. The group’s big ask? For the EU body to require novel food companies to carry out clinical and preclinical medical studies before their products are greenlit.

In a statement justifying its protest, Coldiretti said it was acting upon requests from “illustrious scientists” to ensure greater transparency and scientific attention in the evaluation of novel foods, noting that they “cannot be treated as simple new foods, but must follow the same procedure as drugs”.

As it turns out, the scientists Coldiretti is referring to may not be as independent as they claim, resulting in a significant conflict of interest in the association’s demands, according to reports first reported in Italian media.

‘Concerned scientists’ belong to Coldiretti think tank

Coldiretti cited an inter-institutional technical roundtable established by Health Minister Orazio Schillaci and Agriculture Minister Francesco Lollobrigida in 2024, mere months after the country banned the sale or production of cultivated meat in violation of EU law.

The roundtable assessed the impact of cultivated meat on health, farmers, the economy, and more. Last month, it presented recommendations that cultivated meat and other novel foods should be treated as pharmaceuticals subject to lengthy trials, mimicking the procedure applied by the European Medicine Agency for new drugs.

Meanwhile, a think tank called Aletheia Foundation submitted 11 critical comments to the EFSA early last year, as part of its public consultation on its updated guidelines for cultivated meat regulation, unveiled in July. On its website, Aletheia describes itself as an organisation clarifying “the inextricable link between food and health” via “independent and free research”.

But its recommendations were strikingly similar to those of the roundtable. And according to Italian newspaper Il Foglio, this should come as no surprise, since five of the roundtable’s members are part of Aletheia, which was founded by Coldiretti.

It would appear that the protests sparked by what the union says was a concern from independent scientists are the result of pushback from Coldiretti’s own members.

It also appears the Italian government was aware of the conflict of interest – Schillaci, the Health Minister, was a guest of honour alongside Prandini and Gesmundo in a ‘food and disease’ event held by the ministry and Aletheia last year. During the event, Gesmundo attacked the EFSA for promoting practices that he felt did the most harm to the EU population.

EU clarifies policy after Coldiretti claims victory

After the protest, Coldiretti was quick to claim victory, saying it was “satisfied with EFSA’s commitment to conducting every necessary analysis on every single notified product, including pre-clinical and clinical tests on foods derived from cell cultures and precision fermentation”.

In a statement, EFSA’s senior policy coordinator, Alberto Spagnolli, called the discussion with the group “constructive” and said the request to apply high scientific standards matched the EU’s mission.

“EFSA Panel members will use conditions and requirements for the scientific assessment based on the most recent experience of evaluations, as provided for in the new guidelines in force today,” he said in a statement. “EFSA’s task is precisely to clarify doubts or uncertainties with regards to human health effects, nutritional profiles of these foods, risks linked to the production process or substances used. :

Spagnolli added that the panels would conduct “in-depth, case-by-case, evaluations for each product” and “may use every level of study required (including pre-clinical and clinical tests) to determine safety”.

Speaking to Green Queen, he explained that the “need for clinical trials is already considered” in its guidelines. “Our updated guidance requires that applicants provide comprehensive toxicological studies (similar to pre-clinical studies) to establish the safety of novel food, including cell culture-derived food,” he said.

“If these studies do not enable a conclusive risk assessment, additional tests, including clinical trials in humans, may be requested to resolve data gaps or uncertainties,” Spagnolli added.

However, there’s no precedent for that happening in food, and the EFSA confirmed that Coldiretti’s march hadn’t brought about any additional reforms. “The policy has not changed,” Spagnolli told Green Queen. “We always follow our guidelines for our scientific work, and these were recently updated.”

The protest caused the EFSA to proactively shut down its office for the day and ask employees to not come to work, perhaps mindful of the commotion caused by Coldiretti’s previous protest during the parliament’s final vote on the cultivated meat ban.

Coldiretti’s stunt was criticised by some in the alternative protein industry. “It is not acceptable for an organisation to disrupt the workings of a scientific agency that successfully keeps Europe’s food the safest in the world and, if the results of the investigation are accurate, disturbing that they may have fabricated research to justify their anti-innovation agenda,” Robert E Jones, VP of global public affairs for Mosa Meat, told Green Queen.

The company recently filed for novel food approval for its cultivated beef in the EU. “Fortunately, we know from hundreds of conversations across the EU that [Coldiretti’s] views do not represent mainstream farmers or the agri-food value chain,” Jones added.