Cultivated duck hits multi-tonne scale; dietary rules carry hidden climate cost

Parima produces cultivated duck at 22,000-liter multi-tonne scale

A first attempt at scale on borrowed infrastructure, completed without incident, that changes what the sector can now claim.

France-based Parima ran a 22,000-liter batch of cultivated duck on partner Vow's Sydney production line in July 2026, completing the run on the first attempt with no performance loss versus smaller scales. [61] Parima's cells grow as undifferentiated biomass in suspension, without scaffolds or growth factors, a process closer to fermentation than the tissue-engineering approach used by earlier cultivated meat developers. [61] Regulatory clearances from Singapore and Australia's FSANZ are already in place. A July 2026 Arthur D. Little analysis found the sector is shifting from companies owning their own plants toward producing on shared commercial infrastructure, cutting the capital burden that has stalled competing firms.

• 22,000 literssingle batch volume, described by Vow as the largest cultivated meat production run built to date [61]
• 2regulatory species approvals (chicken and duck in Singapore), a first for any company [61]
• Oct 2025Parima formed from merger of Gourmey and Vital Meat; Singapore duck approval followed six months later [61]

Company claim"99% reduction in production cost compared with its earlier runs" (Parima) [61]. Attributed to cell-culture yield gains and volume efficiencies at 22,000L; no independent audit of the cost comparison exists.

ProvenSingapore regulatory clearance for cultivated duck (April 2026) and FSANZ risk assessment completion (May 2026), regulatory records [61]. Parima became the first company approved for cultivated food across two species.

Fromvegconomist the vegan business magazine

US dietary guidelines could lift food emissions 33%, PNAS study finds

Telling Americans to eat more protein without specifying which kind carries an environmental price tag the guidelines do not mention.

A study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences modeled the environmental consequences of following the Trump administration's 2026 dietary guidelines, which raised the recommended protein intake from 0.8g to 1.2-1.6g per kilogram of body weight and explicitly endorsed red meat, butter, and whole milk. [57] Where that added protein comes from animals, the researchers found 33% higher greenhouse gas emissions, 28% greater land use, and 16% more water consumption than a plant-protein-equivalent increase. [57] They note that a nationwide shift to grass-fed beef could supply only half of current US beef consumption, so more protein from meat necessarily means more industrial production. The authors call the guidelines "hard on the heels of hostility towards climate science."

• 33%higher greenhouse gas emissions in the high animal-protein scenario versus an equivalent plant-protein increase [57]
• 28%greater land use; 16% more water consumption in the same scenario [57]
• 46%of the US diet's current greenhouse gas footprint attributed to ultra-processed foods, two-thirds of which comes from livestock-derived ingredients [57]
• 200+doctors, dietitians, and researchers who wrote to RFK Jr. and Agriculture Secretary Rollins calling the recommendations "at best, confusing, and, at worst, harmful to public health" [57]

Solid"33% higher emissions" for the animal-protein scenario versus an equivalent plant-protein increase (PNAS, peer-reviewed modeling study, doi: 10.1073/pnas.2604814123) [57]. Sound design; the main limitation is the model assumes dietary patterns shift as written, not as historically observed.

Solid"A nationwide transition to grass-fed beef could only support half of the current beef consumption levels in the US" (researchers, PNAS) [57]. Well-established land-use constraint, supported by prior literature cited in the study.

FromGreen Queen

Livekindly Collective acquires Greenforce in European plant-based consolidation

Germany buys more plant-based alternatives than any other European country, and Livekindly just made sure it owns more of that shelf.

Livekindly Collective, owner of Fry's, Oumph, and Like brands, agreed to acquire German startup Greenforce, which sells plant-based meat, cheese, and egg alternatives in Rewe, Edeka, Kaufland, and Spar. [25][58] Germany's plant-based market reached €1.7 billion in 2025, up 3% year-on-year; Livekindly's Like brand holds 57% of the German plant-based strips category and grew 12% last year. [58] Greenforce adds product depth and distribution reach across a market the company already calls its most important in Europe. The deal is one of more than 80 acquisitions, mergers, or closures in the alt-protein sector since September 2024, a wave Livekindly's CEO had publicly forecast.

• €1.7BGerman plant-based market in 2025, up 3% year-on-year [58]
• 57%Like brand's share of the German plant-based strips category, growing 12% last year [58]
• 80+alt-protein companies acquired, merged, or closed since September 2024 [58]
• 40+markets where Livekindly's retail brands now operate [58]

FromGreen QueenJust Food

Meat industry-funded nutrition research 16 times more likely to favor meat

A 16-to-1 odds ratio tells you something the dietary guidelines don't.

A meta-research review in Obesity Reviews analyzed 500 peer-reviewed nutrition studies on meat consumption published between 2014 and 2023 and found that studies with meat industry ties were 16 times more likely to report favorable conclusions about meat than independently funded research. [92] Three-quarters of industry-affiliated studies found meat beneficial; just one reported a negative outcome. [92] Among independently funded studies, 10% reached favorable conclusions. The authors call for tighter conflict-of-interest standards and describe the pattern as directly relevant to how nutrition evidence shapes dietary guidelines and public health policy.

• 500nutrition studies analyzed, published 2014-2023 [92]
• 15.6%reported any industry involvement [92]
• 75%of industry-linked studies reported favorable meat conclusions; 1 reported negative outcomes [92]
• 10%of independently funded studies found meat beneficial [92]

Solid"16 times more likely to report favorable conclusions regarding meat consumption" (Teimouri et al., Obesity Reviews, May 2026; OR = 16.4, 95% CI: 7.5-35.8, p < 0.001) [92]. Peer-reviewed meta-research review of 500 studies across PubMed and Scopus; industry affiliation assessed via author declarations and acknowledgments; limitation is reliance on self-reported disclosure.

FromPlant Based News