Sarah Simpson, director of legal affairs for the Indiana Board of Animal Health, asks lawmakers to maintain her agency’s jurisdiction in a lab-grown meat labeling bill while testifying in committee on Monday, March 3, 2025. (Leslie Bonilla Muñiz/Indiana Capital Chronicle)
An Indiana Senate committee skeptical of lab-grown meat advanced labeling legislation Monday in an 8-1 vote, with edits expected on the chamber’s floor.
To produce “cultivated” meat, manufacturers sample animal cells and multiply them in sealed vats, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The agency has allowed lab-grown meat sales since 2023, when it gave final approval to chicken-derived products by two California companies, Reuters reported.
“All I really want is for consumers to know what they’re consuming,” Rep. Beau Baird, R-Greencastle, told the Indiana Capital Chronicle as he left the Senate Agriculture Committee hearing.
His House Bill 1425 defines “cultivated meat products” and distinguishes them from insect- or plant-based “alternative meat products.” It would require manufacturers to label their products with the following: “This is an imitation meat product,” and would outlaw labeling that doesn’t “clearly indicate” a product is lab-grown.
The labeling requirement split committee members.
Sen. Shelli Yoder, D-Bloomington, sought a more specific term than “imitation.”
She said Hoosier consumers already understand imitation and alternative meats as plant-based, and noted cultivated products are derived from animal cells.
“We actually define ‘cultivated meat product’ in this bill, but then the label is going to say something different,” Yoder said.
A Washington, D.C.-based alternative proteins think tank told the panel the labeling requirement, as it stands, “is simply inaccurate.”
Good Food Institute’s Jeremy Eltz said the legislation could lead to successful definition-based litigation. He asserted that state-specific labeling requirements could discourage companies from entering Indiana, reduce consumer choice, hamper an emerging industry, and limit related jobs.
Others pushed to use the word “fake” on labeling.
Sen. Jim Tomes, R-Wadesville, said a consumer shopping for chicken legs at the grocery store or ordering a burger at a restaurant could easily understand a fake meat label.
“(When) they see the word ‘fake,’ they know exactly what they’re holding in their hands,” he said. “And so, if we have to put that in as our definition — “fake” — and … on the labels, seems like it’s a whole lot easier than coming up with all these other terms and making it real sticky.”
The Board of Animal Health said it’s “more comfortable with” the work “imitation” over “fake.”
“I just know we need to be cognizant of our federal audits,” Legal Affairs Director Sarah Simpson said. She wanted to stay consistent with federal authorities who consider cultivated meat “meat” and wasn’t sure if using the word “fake”would cause the agency problems.
Some were confused why Baird’s bill gives that agency jurisdiction.
“This is not an animal. I don’t understand where that is in your realm,” Sen. Gary Byrne, R-Byrneville, told Simpson. She said that products derived from muscle tissue are considered meat under federal law, so her agency must “follow suit.”
“We essentially mirror” the USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service, Simpson said. “Under our agreement with them, we follow suit. If they regulate, we regulate.”
The agency is neutral on the bill, per Simpson, and primarily wants to ensure it’s given authority to oversee cultivated meat production.
Baird’s bill also tasks the Indiana State Board of Animal Health with inspecting mislabeling complaints and authorizes it to impose penalties of up to $10,000 per mislabeling violation per day. The agency could also sue to stop repeat offenders.
Multiple lawmakers were confused about what cultivated meat products are – and are not — throughout the hearing. Committee leader Sen. Jean Leising, the bill’s first Senate sponsor, said Baird “didn’t get the memo” that his bill was on Monday’s agenda. A second Senate sponsor and the House author of related legislation introduced House Bill 1425 to the committee instead.
“Are there any chicken cells in it?” Sen Blake Doriot, R-Goshen, asked Good Food Institute’s Eltz.
Baird was present to offer closing comments, jokingly offering Indiana State Police thanks “for not pulling me over.” He said the legislation “doesn’t hinder innovation” while offering protections for the food supply, consumers, farmers and ranchers.
He expressed concerns about the production process and told the panel, “If I had my ultimate way, I would completely ban this product.”
Florida has banned cultivated meat. Several lawmakers also said they’d support that.
Some also suggested holding the bill for edits.
Leising resisted, noting that the committee only meets bi-weekly. Sen. Brett Clark, R-Avon, pushed for a vote, saying, “If we get this moved, at least we can continue the discussion. If we do not and kill this, you will have nothing.”
After advancing the legislation and adjourning the meeting, Leising told the Capital Chronicle she was open to ideas from her colleagues for floor amendments.
The committee may soon return from the conversation. Similar legislation dealing with health officer authority over insect- and plant-based “alternative meat products” was re-assigned to the group mid-meeting Monday, to lawmakers’ surprise.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.