Mycoprotein in Focus: Unpacking the Reality of Fake Meat

By Jennifer Wolff-Gillispie HWP, LC

Originally published by A Voice For Choice Advocacy on May 01, 2025.

EDITOR’S SUMMARY: Lab-grown meat and plant-based substitutes promise sustainability and health—but what’s really behind the packaging? Beneath the green labels are industrial processes, synthetic additives, and billionaire-backed agendas. Far from being clean alternatives, these products raise concerns about digestion, nutrition, and long-term safety. The narrative challenges you to rethink the push for food-tech fixes and the quiet corporate takeover of the plate. In contrast, regenerative farming emerges as a soil-to-soul solution that restores ecosystems and nourishes people.

In part one “Fake Meat: Exposing the Fallacy of Food-like Products,” A Voice for Choice Advocacy (AVFCA) unpacked the misleading marketing and potential health risks behind lab-grown and plant-based meat alternatives, including products like the Impossible Burger and Beyond Burger. These engineered foods contain genetically modified ingredients and synthetic compounds—like soy leghemoglobin derived from GM yeast—with unknown long-term health effects. While these items are marketed as environmentally responsible—claiming “75% less water, 87% fewer GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions, and 95% less land” use than ground beef production—their actual impact on ecosystems and resources is far more complicated. Their production relies heavily on industrial farming, agricultural monocropping, and energy-intensive processing, which contributes to soil depletion, biodiversity loss, and increased carbon emissions. In addition to health and environmental concerns, corporate influence plays a major role in promoting plant-based and cell-based ingredients marketed as fake meat. Large companies and policymakers promote these options for profit, lobbying for policies that prioritize lab-grown and processed foods over traditional farming. This highlights issues of food monopolization, shrinking consumer choice, and the prioritization of financial interests over public health.

From Fungi to Food

In the second part of this series on synthetic meats, AVFCA takes a closer look at mycoprotein, a meat substitute derived from mold, the fungus Fusarium venenatum. Manufacturers describe it as a naturally sourced, lab-made product created through the familiar “age-old process of fermentation—the process used to create bread, beer and yogurt.” While the marketing may sound enticing, the potential health risks, dubious nutritional value, and corporate-driven promotion of synthetic meat alternatives are cause for concern. In the pursuit of environmental benefits or a healthier lifestyle, cutting back on animal protein might seem like the right move—but it's worth taking a closer look. As the saying goes, “all that glitters isn’t gold”—and when it comes to fake meat (or fake foods in general), that couldn’t be more true.

Mycoprotein's history traces back to the 1960s when researchers sought new food sources to address global hunger challenges. Scientists in Buckinghamshire, England discovered Fusarium venenatum, a naturally occurring soil fungus, and later developed a fermentation process to grow it at scale. This led to the creation of “Quorn,” the most well-known mycoprotein brand, and the only one to have brought products to market thus far. To produce mycoprotein, the fungus is cultivated in large industrial fermenters, where it is fed carbohydrates, nitrogen, and minerals. Once grown, it undergoes heat treatment to reduce its nucleic acid content before being processed into various food products. Without this treatment, consuming too much nucleic acid can lead to elevated levels of uric acid, which may increase the risk of developing gout or kidney stones. While traditional meat is a complete, bioavailable protein source, mycoprotein lacks the nutritional profile and long-term safety that animal proteins offer. Grass-fed and finished beef, pasture-raised poultry, and wild-caught fish are superior in terms of both safety and nourishment. Though marketed as a clean, natural protein source, consuming mycoprotein can produce harmful metabolites that may lead to health complications. Noted from “Alimentary Risk of Mycotoxins for Humans and Animals”:

"These substances [mycotoxins] are secondary metabolites of some fungi species and are resistant to technological processes (cooking, frying, baking, distillation, fermentation)... Modified mycotoxins are metabolites of mold fungi that normally are undetected when the parent mycotoxin is tested. These modified forms of mycotoxins can be produced by fungi or generated as part of an infected plant’s defense mechanism. In some cases, they are formed during food processing."

Although mycoprotein is advertised as a safe and nutritious choice, an increasing number of reports document allergic reactions and digestive issues associated with its consumption. The Center for Science in the Public Interest states:

"Mycoprotein, the novel ingredient in Quorn-brand frozen meat substitutes, is made from processed mold (Fusarium venenatum) and can cause serious reactions in some people… Typical adverse reactions to Quorn products are vomiting, nausea, and diarrhea. Hives, breathing difficulties, and potentially fatal anaphylactic reactions are less common.”

Class action litigation in federal court in California, Birbrower v. Quorn Foods, Inc., argued that the company used deceptive labeling by referring to its products as “mycoprotein” rather than what they are—mold. As part of the settlement in the case, Quorn Foods agreed:

“Labels for all Quorn products will now state that ‘“Mycoprotein is a mold (member of the fungi family). There have been rare cases of allergic reactions to products that contain mycoprotein.”’

Unlike real meat, which has been consumed for millennia, mycoprotein lacks long-term human studies confirming its safety for the general population and does not have the data to demonstrate its resource efficiency. Despite over 40 years since its invention and $752.98 million in global sales in 2024, its negative impacts on both human health and the environment are evident. According to the study, “Mycoprotein: environmental impact and health aspects”:

“... the high price of this meat substitute narrows its consumption to developed markets, and the raw materials used in the product formulation impose a high environmental impact compared to other vegetarian options.”

Mycoprotein production requires significant energy inputs, glucose feedstock (a raw material derived from glucose, often sourced from monoculture crops), and large-scale manufacturing. While companies may try to hide behind the banner of sustainability, the fungal origins and industrial processing raise significant concerns. This food-like substance may trigger unintended health consequences, especially for individuals with weakened immune systems, underlying health conditions, or environmental allergies to molds. This could pose a significant problem for you if you have an adverse reaction to this imitation “food,” as doctors might not recognize that mold is the cause—potentially leading to delayed or inadequate treatment. In the study, “Immediate-type hypersensitivity reaction to ingestion of mycoprotein (Quorn) in a patient allergic to molds caused by acidic ribosomal protein P2,” this was demonstrated: The researchers found:

“The patient showed high sensitization to many known aeroallergens [environmental] but apart from Quorn [mycoprotein] not to any other tested food samples.”

The growing trend of plant, cell-derived, or fungus-based proteins is not merely about sustainability; it is driven by powerful corporations and investors aiming to dominate the future of food production. Companies like Marlow Foods (Quorn’s parent company), along with newer players such as Nature’s Fynd and Meati Foods have received significant backing from venture capitalists and multinational food conglomerates. In 2021, The Better Meat Co. made a deal with Hormel to develop products made with “Rhiza mycoprotein” and will “work together to develop the next generation of great-tasting, wholesome, and sustainable alternative protein products.” This is part of a broader effort to shift consumers away from traditional farming and toward patented, branded, industrialized food systems that generate massive profits for corporations. According to Crunchbase News, “foodtech” hit a record high globally in 2021:

“$5.8 billion… went into companies creating alternatives to traditionally produced meat, seafood and dairy products, including startups working on lab-created protein and plant-based meat and dairy substitutes.”

What makes manufactured “meat” so appealing to investors is that both the technology used to produce it and the final product can be patented—unlike animal meat. These proprietary technologies offer long-term control over production and pricing, giving corporations a powerful stake in the future of food. Just as pharmaceutical companies research natural botanicals with healing properties, study their profiles, and develop new formulations, these food technologies apply similar methods to engineer proteins and create novel food products for profit. While cutting-edge technology attempts to mimic the nutrient profile, taste, and texture of real meat, the result remains a far cry from the real thing. Navdanya International, a “seed and food sovereignty” movement that began 30 years ago in India, weighs in on the future of food—where Big Tech, Big Ag, and Big Pharma converge:

“Given the widespread success of the plant-based industry, it is not surprising that big plant-breeding companies like Bayer also see a great opportunity for investment and expansion in this market. As put by Bob Reiter, Bayer’s head of research and development at the company’s crop science division, in reference to plant based-meat companies: ‘“They are sourcing different types of crops and that could also create opportunity for us, being a company that is a plant-breeding company.”’

The Good Food Institute, a food lobby group focused on making “animal agriculture obsolete,” has enthusiastically endorsed fake meat, reporting a 43% increase in industry sales between 2018 and 2020. This exponentially expanding market has undoubtedly caught the eyes of meat industry behemoths like Tyson foods, JBS, Cargill, Nestlé, and Maple Leaf Foods who have begun investing in meat alternative enterprises. Even Big Tech investors like Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos want in on this cash cow, investing millions in fake food technologies that include not only meat, but also substitute eggs and dairy. Bill Gates, a vocal advocate of artificial solutions to natural problems, in an interview with MIT Technology Review, said “all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef,” in what he believes would be an effective move at combating climate change. The bankrolling of these processed, synthetic food replacements raises ethical concerns about transparency and consumer choice. Are these companies genuinely invested in your health and the ecological balance of the planet, or are they simply capitalizing on the latest food industry trend?

Nourishing with Real Food

The human body evolved to thrive on whole, nutrient-dense foods—grass-fed and finished meats, wild-caught seafood, vegetables, pastured eggs, raw dairy, and fruit—rich in essential vitamins, minerals, and amino acids in their most bioavailable forms. These foods (preferably organic) continue to be the gold standard in nutrition. In contrast, synthetic and lab-grown imitations attempt to mimic these nutrients but fall short in quality and digestibility. The iron found in red meat, for example, is heme iron, which is far more absorbable than the non-heme iron found in plants and fungi. Similarly, vitamin B12 is naturally present in animal products but must be artificially added to plant-based and mycoprotein-based foods. Although often promoted as a benefit, the high fiber content of mycoprotein can interfere with nutrient absorption and cause digestive discomfort in sensitive individuals. The fungal cell walls in mycoprotein contain beta-glucans (a type of soluble fiber) and chitin (a naturally occurring polysaccharide), which can make it harder to digest than traditional meat and reduce its nutritional efficacy.

Saturated fats, especially the types found in the sources listed above, are proven to strengthen bones, support healthy brain composition, provide crucial fat soluble vitamins, strengthen the immune system, and promote heart health. No synthetic alternative can replicate the bioavailability and evolutionary compatibility of these traditional protein sources. Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) are undeniably unsustainable—but manufacturing meat isn't the solution. As Joel Salatin, farmer, author, and outspoken advocate for regenerative agriculture (who proudly calls himself a “Lunatic Farmer”), puts it:

“The more we process food, the more we rob it of its vitality.” We’ve turned nourishment into convenience, but at a huge cost to our health.”

Permaculture-raised animals—nurtured on principles of sustainability, biodiversity, and ecological harmony, which support both animal welfare and the health of the land—do more than just provide food. They help heal the planet in ways that factory farming and fake meat never can. Unlike CAFOs, which pollute waterways, degrade soil, and rely on antibiotics, permaculture integrates animals into natural ecosystems, allowing them to graze freely, fertilize the land, and restore soil health. Joel weighs in again, this time on how cows and other ruminants are naturally built to convert grass into fuel and how, when managed properly, they support the environment and ecosystem. Cited from “Joel Salatin: Cows, Carbon and Climate at TEDxCharlottesville (Transcript)”:

“The herbivore is doing what she’s always done. She’s a 4-wheel-drive, portable sauerkraut vat, turning carbohydrates, fermenting it into meat and milk, nutrient-dense food. She’s doing exactly what she was supposed to do. But she’s not being managed the way the wild herds and the migratory patterns were managed where they moved. And they vacated areas long enough for the forage to go through this magnificent 50, 60, 70-day physiological expression cycle, and then be pruned back and harvested at the appropriate time.”

Regenerative farming prevents overgrazing, boosts biodiversity, and captures carbon, combating and reversing decades of poor agricultural practices and environmental damage. Unlike fake meat made from mold, animal cell lines, or GMO ingredients—produced through industrial monocropping, heavy processing, and synthetic additives—permaculture-based agriculture offers an environmentally responsible solution that nourishes both the land and people. By cooperating with nature rather than manipulating it, you can restore ecosystems, enrich the soil, and produce more nutrient-rich food—paving the way for a resilient, ethical food system well into the future.

~

If you've found value in this article, please cross-post and restack it!

To support the research and health education of AVFC editorial, please consider making a donation today. Thank you.