From the eu Parliament document:
*3. ‘Meat products’ means processed products resulting from the processing of meat or from the further processing of such processed products, so that the cut surface shows that the product no longer has the characteristics of fresh meat. Names that fall under Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 that are currently used for meat products and meat preparations shall be reserved exclusively for products containing meat.
This not only affects vegetarian food, but also salmon steak for example. It’s a populist political move that doesn’t seem to be backed up by any linguistic science, as if mystery sausages haven’t been a thing for centuries. As long as it looks like a sausage, it is a sausage imo. It’s also not law yet, the member states still have to approve those amendements.
Ps, this gave me an idea for possible vegetarian branding: names like “not a burger” seem to still be allowed, so a line of foodstuffs called “not a sausage” etc might be fun.
Ps, this gave me an idea for possible vegetarian branding: names like “not a burger” seem to still be allowed, so a line of foodstuffs called “not a sausage” etc might be fun.
That’s definitely gonna happen, there’s already a plant drink brand named “this is not m*lk” (including the censoring) in Germany, as here a similar ban is already in effect for the word “milk” to exclude soy milk / oat milk / …
Which is really funny because soy milk, oat milk, and almond milk have existed as such for literally hundreds of years. And etymologically cow’s milk actually takes its name from those, not the other way around.
I was apparently misremembering something. It’s still a fact though that the word milk has been associated with alternate plant based versions for literal centuries.
This not only affects vegetarian food, but also salmon steak for example.
Where are you getting this from? In the document you linked they define meat as “edible parts of the animals” and I can’t find any wording in here that would exclude fish from being meat.
What that article includes under meat: “Meat, including domestic ungulates (bovine, porcine, ovine and caprine species); poultry and lagomorphs (farmed birds, rabbits, hares and rodents); farmed and wild game; minced meat, meat preparations and mechanically separated/recovered meat; and meat products.”
I mean… if they meant “meat” literally as flesh/muscle fiber, then eggs would not meet the definition either.
However, wouldn’t that definition also technically mean that milk can also be categorized as a meat product? Same for honey. Someone also mentioned peanut butter in another comment, is butter considered meat as well since it often comes from milk?
And what about broth/stock? …chicken stock is common, does that mean that now it should be considered a meat product and you can no longer have vegetable stock?
I found a moment to look up that edible part that you found: "For the purposes of this part, ‘meat’ means edible parts of the animals referred to in points 1.2 to 1.8 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, " So no, they do not define meat as the edible parts of the animals, they define meat as the edible parts of the animals referred to in points 1.2 to 1.8 of Annex I etc. You can’t just ignore parts of a definition.
1.2 to 1.8 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 is:
“Meat” means edible parts of the animals referred to in points 1.2 to 1.8, including blood.
1.2. “Domestic ungulates” means domestic bovine (including Bubalus and Bison species), porcine, ovine and caprine animals, and domestic solipeds.
1.3. “Poultry” means farmed birds, including birds that are not considered as domestic but which are farmed as domestic animals, with the exception of ratites.
1.4. “Lagomorphs” means rabbits, hares and rodents.
1.5. “Wild game” means:
—
wild ungulates and lagomorphs, as well as other land mammals that are hunted for human consumption and are considered to be wild game under the applicable law in the Member State concerned, including mammals living in enclosed territory under conditions of freedom similar to those of wild game; and
—
wild birds that are hunted for human consumption.
1.6. “Fanned game” means farmed ratites and farmed land mammals other than those referred to in point 1.2.
1.7. “Small wild game” means wild game birds and lagomorphs living freely in the wild.
1.8. “Large wild game” means wild land mammals living freely in the wild that do not fall within the definition of small wild game.
From the eu Parliament document: *3. ‘Meat products’ means processed products resulting from the processing of meat or from the further processing of such processed products, so that the cut surface shows that the product no longer has the characteristics of fresh meat. Names that fall under Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 that are currently used for meat products and meat preparations shall be reserved exclusively for products containing meat.
These names include, for example:
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-10-2025-0161_EN.html Use ctrl+f “burger” to find it in the text.
This not only affects vegetarian food, but also salmon steak for example. It’s a populist political move that doesn’t seem to be backed up by any linguistic science, as if mystery sausages haven’t been a thing for centuries. As long as it looks like a sausage, it is a sausage imo. It’s also not law yet, the member states still have to approve those amendements.
Ps, this gave me an idea for possible vegetarian branding: names like “not a burger” seem to still be allowed, so a line of foodstuffs called “not a sausage” etc might be fun.
That’s definitely gonna happen, there’s already a plant drink brand named “this is not m*lk” (including the censoring) in Germany, as here a similar ban is already in effect for the word “milk” to exclude soy milk / oat milk / …
They should just change one or two letters or make them phonetically similar. Such as borgir, sossich, wurzt and stek.
Edit: Been having issues with Lemmy today. That’s probably why it triple posted my comment.
In Germany I’ve seen some vegan restaurants replace some letter with “v” for vegan.
Like “vurst” instead of “wurst” (sausage) or “vleish” instead of “fleish” (meat).
Which is really funny because soy milk, oat milk, and almond milk have existed as such for literally hundreds of years.
And etymologically cow’s milk actually takes its name from those, not the other way around.I was apparently misremembering something. It’s still a fact though that the word milk has been associated with alternate plant based versions for literal centuries.
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/almond-milk-obsession-origins-middle-ages
Source? That seems unlikely
Yeah I was misremembering something saw at some point. The other point still stands though.
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/almond-milk-obsession-origins-middle-ages
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Looking forward to “extruded logs” hitting the shelves
Where are you getting this from? In the document you linked they define meat as “edible parts of the animals” and I can’t find any wording in here that would exclude fish from being meat.
Afaik fish is not considered meat, definitely not in colloquial language. With a quick search I found another EU article which mentions meat and fish, and they list meat and fishery products as being different things: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/summary/hygiene-rules-for-food-of-animal-origin.html
What that article includes under meat: “Meat, including domestic ungulates (bovine, porcine, ovine and caprine species); poultry and lagomorphs (farmed birds, rabbits, hares and rodents); farmed and wild game; minced meat, meat preparations and mechanically separated/recovered meat; and meat products.”
I mean… if they meant “meat” literally as flesh/muscle fiber, then eggs would not meet the definition either.
However, wouldn’t that definition also technically mean that milk can also be categorized as a meat product? Same for honey. Someone also mentioned peanut butter in another comment, is butter considered meat as well since it often comes from milk?
And what about broth/stock? …chicken stock is common, does that mean that now it should be considered a meat product and you can no longer have vegetable stock?
I found a moment to look up that edible part that you found: "For the purposes of this part, ‘meat’ means edible parts of the animals referred to in points 1.2 to 1.8 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, " So no, they do not define meat as the edible parts of the animals, they define meat as the edible parts of the animals referred to in points 1.2 to 1.8 of Annex I etc. You can’t just ignore parts of a definition.
1.2 to 1.8 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 is:
“Meat” means edible parts of the animals referred to in points 1.2 to 1.8, including blood.
1.2. “Domestic ungulates” means domestic bovine (including Bubalus and Bison species), porcine, ovine and caprine animals, and domestic solipeds.
1.3. “Poultry” means farmed birds, including birds that are not considered as domestic but which are farmed as domestic animals, with the exception of ratites.
1.4. “Lagomorphs” means rabbits, hares and rodents.
1.5. “Wild game” means:
—
wild ungulates and lagomorphs, as well as other land mammals that are hunted for human consumption and are considered to be wild game under the applicable law in the Member State concerned, including mammals living in enclosed territory under conditions of freedom similar to those of wild game; and
—
wild birds that are hunted for human consumption.
1.6. “Fanned game” means farmed ratites and farmed land mammals other than those referred to in point 1.2.
1.7. “Small wild game” means wild game birds and lagomorphs living freely in the wild.
1.8. “Large wild game” means wild land mammals living freely in the wild that do not fall within the definition of small wild game.