this sounds more like industry FUD. People are able to get there daily sustenance from gruel. Yes it may not fit your definition of food, but this is a first world complaint. There are millions of people around the world starving, that this technique could help.
Did you read that linked Michael Pollan piece? If not, please do, it's good. So is his other work. He's not an industry shill spreading FUD. There are serious gaps in our understanding of nutrition. Suggesting that lab grown meat might lack something that "real" meat has isn't FUD. There may be more nutritionally sound food sources than vat meat for people currently starving or subsisting on gruel.
Yes, it is confusing to put meat in a category of foods missing from first-world diets. Should we add caviar and pound cake to that list too?
More significant: will it be a diet improvement to replace fatty hamburger with this 'meat'? Perhaps - since Americans eat pounds of meat per day, a whole week's worth of protein in a Wendy's Double with Cheese.
I imagine there are far more useful things to worry about in the American diet, than subtle differences between a single strain of pork muscle vs which strain of angus they're eating. Like how much they're eating; how much fat, salt, empty carbohydrates.
If you are worried for yourself, fine, FUD away and eat vegan. But as a social phenomenon, I can't see how lab-meat can be very harmful, and it is a certain good.
