The meat industry back at it again when this was already discussed and ridiculed last year
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2025
31 points (100.0% liked)
Europe
437 readers
92 users here now
Europe community on dbzer0. Intended to be a place to discuss European news, politics, or just general topics from a European perspective. Since this is on dbzer0 expect the community to lean more leftist-anarchist but a wide range of views are accepted here (within reason).
Rules:
1. No Bigotry or Hate Speech
Any forms of Homophobia, Transphobia, Queerphobia, Racism, or Ableism will be met with swift and harsh action and will not be tolerated here whatsoever. Bigots will be banned immediately on-sight. This includes apologia of it.
Trying to be politely or intellectually bigoted i.e. "Just asking questions" won't be tolerated.
2. No Zionism
Any forms of Zionism or Zionist rhetoric will not be tolerated here, this includes Zionist apologia, accusations of antisemitism towards anti-Zionists, or blatant denial or downplaying of the genocide towards Palestinians. Any attempt to uphold or prop up the IHRA definition of antisemitism, will be treated as Zionism.
Anyone engaging in Pro-Zionist sentiment or apologia will be actioned in accordance with its severity.
Note: Trying to find loopholes or whataboutery to see what is or isn't genocide denial or Zionism will be treated as a violation of this rule. Don't test us.
3. Stay Civil
Please maintain civil discourse in the community. Do not engage in arguments with others, name-calling, or insults. Note that calling out bigotry or Zionism is not considered an insult. In heated arguments users are encouraged to or even required to disengage failure to do so will result in mod action.
4. No Misinformation
Spreading of misinformation intentionally in this community is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Spreading misinformation hurts the credibility of the community and can mislead people sometimes in dangerous ways. Users who intentionally post misinformation as articles, comment answers, or in attempt to win arguments will be actioned swiftly.
Note: This includes Russian and Chinese propaganda. Users with a history of such posting will be banned on sight.
5. No AI Content
Please do not post articles or content primarily created using generative AI. Generative AI content may contain misinformation or be lower quality and thus is discouraged. Posts and comments featuring it will be removed. However this community does not allow or tolerate Anti-AI trolling or hostility and users who engage in such behavior will be actioned for it, additionally Anti-AI trolling violates Rule 3 and often Rule 4 so it is generally unacceptable already.
Note: Rules 1 & 2 may be subject to preemptive mod action due to their severity, and they apply to a user's entire post history. Not just this community.
founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
European Commission aims to prevent plant-based products from using 29 “meaty” terms, including “beef”, “pork”, and “chicken”.
Good, products names should not be misleading.
Two previous amendments that would have restricted the labelling of plant-based meat — including terms such as “burger” and “sausage” — were rejected by MEPs in 2020. Furthermore, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled last October that no member state could prohibit plant-based alternatives from using terms traditionally associated with animal products, as long as the ingredients are clearly shown on the label.
And?
Beef, pork and chicken are meats from specific animals. There is no such thing as "vegan chicken".
You can argue that "sausage" is a form rather than a filling. Burgers are similiar with "chicken burger" and "veggie burger".
And : IMO the decision of the European Parliament supersedes the panic of the meat industry when it comes to vocabulary. Language evolves. I don't see them attacking beauty products because they're selling "cream"
FYI : this was already a thing in France circa 2022 and was quickly shut down because of how ridiculous of a request this is
Do you consider beauty products foodstuff? Because obviously the risk of confusion is higher within the same product category...
I don't, and yes of course it is, but for example plant-based “chicken” is not being sold as just “chicken.” It’s always labeled “plant-based chicken”, “vegan chicken”, etc. That’s within the same product category, and still not confusing to consumers ; see the study linked in the article (https://www.beuc.eu/sites/default/files/publications/beuc-x-2020-042_consumers_and_the_transition_to_sustainable_food.pdf).
So the real question is: is there actual confusion happening among consumers buying food? And the answer from courts, regulators, and common sense has been a consistent no because context is already doing its job.
But plant-based chicken makes no sense. It has no chicken in it. Your link refers to "meaty names", such as sausages, burgers and such.
most consumers do not appear to be concerned about the naming of veggie ‘burgers’ or ‘sausages’, as long as the products are clearly identifiable as vegetarian/vegan
The actual question used in the survey
To what extent do you agree that companies use meat-related names like sausage and burger to de- scribe meat-free vegetarian products (e.g. a veggie burger)?”
They do mention
A reference to the flavour of the original meat product in the name was also supported (e.g. “liver pâté flavoured veggie spread”). Only 38% of respondents thought that vegetarian/vegan products should bear completely new names, with no reference to the animal products they ‘imitate’.
"Chicken flavoured veggie spread" might pass, though it sounds a bit like it was flavoured with chicken and not "chinken flavoured", so a source of confusion there too.
I don't see them attacking beauty products because they're selling "cream"
And this is comparable to misinforming customers by calling vegetable product "chicken" how, exactly?
We're not talking about vegetables products but plant based alternatives. We're not talking about protected product names but common words used in our vocabulary daily.
We are talking about blatant lies here as calling vegetable (or plant if you want to) product a "chicken" is a blatant lie - and should rightly be banned. If it says "chicken" it must be a chicken.
By your logic, so would be the beefsteak tomato, almond milk, coco cream, butternut... Which are actual vegetables.
If you consider yourself not capable enough to read the ingredients when selecting a product to buy, that's on you. This is what the CJEU is saying: there is no misleading in using these terms. There has been zero recorded intent at misleading consumers from plant based alternatives producers.
Do you get mad at the "misleading animal names" meme?
I find it funny too that further down they're throwing things like "almond milk" under the bus despite the fact that plant milk is not nearly novel and has been called "milk" for centuries. This isn't just them conservatively gatekeeping novel language like "chick'n". It's in fact trying to regressively erase this longstanding and commonly understood usage of "milk" because it hurts their feelings. "Peanut butter" hasn't been called "butter" for nearly as long, but I'm sure they'd pull a "that's not the same tho!!" if you brought it up as evidence that their argument is ad hoc nonsense.
And when their argument for not calling it "almond milk" is baseless garbage meant to mask "I just don't like it, waaaah", why should we take them seriously when it comes to plant-based meats?
By your logic, so would be the beefsteak tomato, almond milk, coco cream, butternut... Which are actual vegetables.
Are you a little bit slow? As you struggle to comprehend the subject we are discussing.
If you consider yourself not capable enough to read the ingredients when selecting a product to buy, that's on you
There are certain EU and UK rules around naming. Product called chicken must contain chicken not some pulp animal feed.
This is what the CJEU is saying
This is absolutely NOT what it is saying and I don't know if you are arguing in bad faith or you are just dim.
Let's try again:
Burger does not imply coming from any kind of meat. You have beefburgers, chickenburgers, soyaburgers, vegiburgers etc.
Sausage also does not imply it is coming specifically from a meat.
This is all the court said.
Chicken, pork or beef are definitely implying coming from specific animals and calling some plant pulp either of these names is clearly misleading.
Comprende?
Happy to keep debating. Less so if we’re just going to trade insults. If you have a solid point, make it, no need to get nasty.
-
The CJEU ruling did say that member states can’t ban plant-based products from using meat-related terms if the labeling is clear. That’s literally what it ruled. You don’t get to rewrite case law just because it doesn’t fit your perspective.
-
No one is selling something called just “chicken” when it’s made from plants — it’s always labeled “vegan chicken”, “plant-based chicken”, etc. That’s not misleading. That’s clear communication, and it works — the CJEU said this is fine as long as the ingredients list is transparent.
-
Dismissing the examples of almond milk, beefsteak tomatoes, or coconut cream just because they don’t fit your argument doesn’t make them disappear. Language evolves. These aren’t “gotchas” — they’re everyday proof of how people understand food labeling in real life.
If your main concern is protecting consumers, we agree. But pretending this is some epidemic of deception when zero data backs that up? That’s just the meat lobby talking.
it’s always labeled “vegan chicken”, “plant-based chicken”
There. Is. No. Such. Thing.
Dismissing the examples of almond milk, beefsteak tomatoes, or coconut cream just because they don’t fit your argument
I don't anymore think you are that dim as nobody can be. You must be arguing in bad faith than.
"beefsteak tomatoes" is an actual NAME of these tomatoes.
almond milk & coconut cream - this is EXACTLY the same situation as with burgers.
Now, it is clear you are arguing in bad faith. Disengage.
Then you have a problem with reality itself, I highly encourage you to visit plant based alternative aisles if you can, to ground your arguments with facts. If you can't debate without being condescending, we're done here. Bye.
I guess we should also ban imitation crab.
Carmine lipstick that isn't made with beetles.
Artificial sweeteners that don't have any sugar but tastes like.
Parchment should only be made of animals skin.
and there's probably a shit ton of products that are actually replacement things.
I guess we should also ban imitation crab
It isn't allowed to be called "crab" in the UK and rightly so.
Artificial sweeteners that don't have any sugar but tastes like.
Why? They don't claim to be made of sugar.
Parchment should only be made of animals skin.
Why?
If you find that misleading, then that's on you. It's really not hard to differentiate veggie products from real dead animals. Furthermore, the terms are more than justified as the flavors come from the same or similar compounds, especially with chicken.
Next, sell low quality beef burgers and call it vegan. If you can't differentiate between meat and ultra processed pea protein it's on you.
If it says it's a chicken product then a normal person is expecting a chicken product lmao
I wonder how you'd react if someone was selling a meat product as vegan and justified it as "vegan style spices" or some nonsense. "If you find that misleading then that's on you."
Don't sell stuff as pork if it isn't pork. Burger is fine, sausage is fine, pork, chicken, beef are all misleading.
So I should be able to label petroleum as chocolate. After all, its distincive odor came from a (kinda remotely) similar compound. (/s)
Vegan ribs sound pretty confusing. Beef, pork and chicken sound like obvious ones to be restricted to actual beef, pork and chicken products.
'Vegan ribs" are self explanatory. They are the BBQ'd ribs of a vegan. They are however, not vegan or vegetarian.