Ventajas y desventajas del cultivo de carne in vitro: perspectivas desde la seguridad alimentaria

  • Andrés Cartín-Rojas Universidad Estatal a Distancia, San José
  • Priscila Ortiz Laboratorio Veterinario Innova-Células Madre, San José
Palabras clave: células madre, carne, ingeniería de tejidos, seguridad alimentaria

Resumen

Los modelos tradicionales de producción animal suponen un gran costo ambiental y económico. También existen consideraciones éticas alrededor del bienestar animal con base en ciertos esquemas productivos. Estos aspectos, junto al hecho del incremento esperado en la demanda de proteína animal, paralelo al crecimiento poblacional para 2050, obligan a la industria cárnica y al sector agropecuario a buscar técnicas alternativas de producción animal. La carne cultivada parece ser una opción viable y plausible para resolver muchos de estos retos. El artículo aborda el tema de la ingeniería de tejidos, enfocado en las ventajas y desventajas de la producción in vitro, como una posible línea de investigación futura para paliar el hambre y la inseguridad alimentaria de forma ambientalmente sostenible.

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.

Biografía del autor

Andrés Cartín-Rojas, Universidad Estatal a Distancia, San José

Doctor médico veterinario. MS cátedra de Ciencias Agropecuarias, Facultad de Ingeniería Agronómica, Escuela de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad Estatal a Distancia, San José, Costa Rica.

Priscila Ortiz, Laboratorio Veterinario Innova-Células Madre, San José

Doctor médico veterinario. Laboratorio Veterinario Innova-Células Madre, San José, Costa Rica.

Referencias

1. Ghosh S, Suri D, Uauy R. Assessment of protein adequacy in developing countries: quality matters. Brit J Nutr. 2012; 108(supl. 2):S77-87. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114512002577

2. Wu G, Fanzo J, Miller D, Pingali P, Post M, Steiner J, Thalacker-Mercer A. Production and supply of highquality food protein for human consumption: sustainability, challenges, and innovations. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2014;1321:1-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12500

3. Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura. Panorama de la seguridad alimentaria y nutricional en América Latina y el Caribe. Oficina Regional de la FAO para América Latina y el Caribe [internet]. 2017 [citado 2017 oct 28]. Disponible en: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/rlc/docs/panorama2017/PANORAMA_2017.pdf

4. Wald N, Hill D. ‘Rescaling’ alternative food systems: from food security to food sovereignty. Agric Hum Values. 2016;33(1):203-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-015-9623-x

5. Weiler A, Hergesheimer C, Brisbois B, Wittman H, Yassi A, Spiegel J. Food sovereignty, food security and health equity: a meta-narrative mapping exercise. Health Policy Plan. 2015;30(8):1078-92. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czu109

6. D’Odorico P, Carr J, Laio F, Ridolfi L, Vandoni S. Feeding humanity through global food trade. Earth’s Future. 2014;2(9):458-69. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014EF000250

7. Jönsson, E. Benevolent technotopias and hitherto unimaginable meats: Tracing the promises of in vitro meat. Soc Stud Sci. 2016;46(5):725-48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312716658561

8. Stephens N, Ruivenkamp M. Promise and ontological ambiguity in the in vitro meat imagescape: from laboratory myotubes to the cultured burger. Sci Cult (Lond). 2016;25(3):327-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2016.1171836

9. Godfray H, Garnett T. Food security and sustainable intensification. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2014;369(1639):1-10.

10. Henchion M, McCarthy M, Resconi V, Troy D. Meat consumption: trends and quality matters. Meat Sci. 2014;98(3):561-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.06.007

11. Sentandreu M, Sentandreu E. Authenticity of meat products: Tools against fraud. Food Res Int. 2014;60:19-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2014.03.030

12. Lammie S, Hughes J. Antimicrobial resistance, food safety, and one health: the need for convergence. Annu Rev Food Sci Technol. 2016;7:287-312. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-041715-033251

13. Filippitzi M, Goumperis T, Robinson T, Saegerman C. Microbiological zoonotic emerging risks, transmitted between livestock animals and humans (2007-2015). Transbound Emerg Dis. 2017;64(4):1059-70. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbed.12484

14. Russell R, Katz R, Richgels K, Walsh D, Grant E. A framework for modeling emerging diseases to inform management. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23(1):1-6. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2301.161452

15. Arshad M, Javed M, Sohaib M, Saeed F, Imran A, Amjad Z. Tissue engineering approaches to develop cultured meat from cells: A mini review. Cogent Food Agric. 2017;3(1):1320814. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2017.1320814

16. Bhat Z, Fayaz H. Prospectus of cultured meatadvancing meat alternatives. J Food Sci Tech. 2011;48(2):125-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-010-0198-7

17. Van der Weele C, Clemens D. Emerging profiles for cultured meat; ethics through and as design. Animals. 2013;3(3):647-62. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani3030647

18. Pérez-Serrano R, Ramírez-Espinoza J, Shimada A, Antaramian A, Piña E, Mora O. Células troncales mesenquimales: biología, caracterización y futuras aplicaciones en salud y producción de especies domésticas y pecuarias. Parte II. Agrociencia. 2012;46(6):543-55.

19. Ford J. Impact of cultured meat on global agriculture. World Agricult. 2011;2(2):43-6.

20. Langelaan M, Boonen K, Polak R, Baaijens F, Post M, van der Schaft D. Meet the new meat: tissue engineered skeletal muscle. Trends Food Sci Tech. 2010;21(2):59-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2009.11.001

21. Da Costa E, Restle J, Brondani I, Perottoni L, Faturi C, Menezes L. Composição física da carcaça, qualidade da carne e conteúdo de colesterol no músculo longissimus dorsi de novilhos red angus superprecoces, terminados em confinamento e abatidos com diferentes pesos. Rev Bras Zootec. 2002;31(supl. 1):417-28. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-35982002000200017

22. Salifou C, Dahouda M, Houaga I, Picard B, Hornick J, Micol D, et al. Muscle characteristics, meat tenderness and nutritional qualities traits of borgou, lagunaire and zebu fulani bulls raised on natural pasture in Benin. Int J Anim Vet Adv. 2013;4(5):143-55.

23. Tuomisto H, Texeira J. Environmental impacts of cultured meat production. Environ Sci Technol. 2011;45(14):6117-23. https://doi.org/10.1021/es200130u

24. Bhat Z, Bhat H. Tissue engineered meat-future meat. J Stored Prod Postharvest Res. 2011;2(1):1-10.

25. Carruth A. Culturing food: bioart and in vitro meat. Parallax. 2013;19(1):88-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/13534645.2013.743296

26. Mattick CS, Allenby BR. (2012). Cultured meat: The systemic implications of an emerging technology. En IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology. 2012 [6228020]. DOI: 10.1109/ISSST.2012.6228020 https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSST.2012.6228020

27. De Smet S, Vossen E. Meat: the balance between nutrition and health. A review. Meat Sci. 2016;120:145-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.008

28. Boler D, Woerner D. What is meat? A perspective from the American Meat Science Association. Anim Front. 2017;7(4):8-11. https://doi.org/10.2527/af.2017.0436

29. Pal M, Patel A, Bariya A, Godishala V, Kandi V. A review of biotechnological Applications in Food Processing of Animal Origin. Am J Food Sci Tech. 2017;5(4):143-8.

30. Goodwin J, Shoulders C. The future of meat: a qualitative analysis of cultured meat media coverage. Meat Sci. 2013;95(3):445-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.05.027

31. Noor S, Radhakrishnan N, Hussain K. Newer trends and techniques adopted for manufacturing of In vitro meat through “tissue-engineering” technology: a review. Int J Biotech Trends Tech. 2016;19:14-9. https://doi.org/10.14445/22490183/IJBTT-V19P604

32. Post M. Cultured meat from term cells: challenges and prospects. Meat Sci. 2012;92(3):297-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.008

33. Hocquette J. Is in vitro meat the solution for the future? Meat Sci. 2016;120:167-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.04.036

34. Verbeke W, Marcu A, Rutsaert P, Gaspar R, Seibt B, Fletcher D, Barnett J. A. ‘Would you eat cultured meat?’: Consumers’ reactions and attitude formation in Belgium, Portugal and the United Kingdom. Meat Sci. 2015;102:49-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.11.013

35. Vital A, Kempinski E, de Moraes Pinto L, Nascimento K, Alexandre S, do Prado I. Produção de carne in vitro: nova realidade da sociedade moderna. PUBVET. 2017;11(9):840-7. https://doi.org/10.22256/pubvet.v11n9.840-847

36. Verbeke W, Sans P, Van Loo E. Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat. J Integr Agr. 2015;14(2):285-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60884-4

37. Wilks M, Phillips C. Attitudes to in vitro meat: A survey of potential consumers in the United States. PLoS One. 2017;12(2):e0171904. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171904

38. Laestadius L, Caldwell M. Is the future of meat palatable? Perceptions of in vitro meat as evidenced by online news comments. Public Health Nutr. 2015;18(13):2457-67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980015000622

39. Bartholet J. Inside the meat lab. Sci Am. 2011;304(6):64-69. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0611-64

40. Heffernan O. Sustainability: a meat issue. Nature. 2017;544:S18-S20. https://doi.org/10.1038/544S18a
Cómo citar
Cartín-Rojas, A., & Ortiz, P. (2017, diciembre 11). Ventajas y desventajas del cultivo de carne in vitro: perspectivas desde la seguridad alimentaria. Revista De Medicina Veterinaria, (36), 135-144. https://doi.org/10.19052/mv.5179
Publicado
2017-12-11
Sección
Artículos