Saturday 11 August 2012

Medlink pathology project results

I've just seen the results for the paper I wrote on in vitro meat production and I got a distinction! Woooooo!

For people who actually want to read the paper, I'll put it after the break.


Meat derived from stem cells:

How, what and why


 

 

 

 

 

By

Jack Williams



















RESARCH PAPER
BASED ON
PATHOLOGY LECTURES
AT MEDLINK 2011

Abstract

      The world's meat demand is increasing at such a rate that farming animals conventionally will not always be possible to satisfy it. If meat can be made in laboratories or factories on an industrial scale without the need for the whole animal, many of the problems associated with its production and consumption will be solved. Currently, economical and technological limitations prevent this from being a reality.

Introduction

            Problems relating to meat in the world today can be broadly grouped into three main areas: ethical, ecological, and health.
           
Ethical concerns about meat are embodied in organisations such as PETA, and revolve around the treatment of animals1. There is evidence that some livestock, especially pigs, may be more conscious than had been previously thought. In the UK, many animals are killed unnecessarily inhumanely2, and ethical concerns do not stop at the animals: workers are reported to be mistreated and underpaid3.
           
            Ecological worries over rearing and consumption of meat are more complex, but perhaps more concrete. The world's population is larger than at any point in history, and more people are consuming more meat.4 Increased demand for meat results in more land being used for livestock, with consequent deforestation and destruction of other habitat.5 As such, the meat industry is contributing significantly towards climate change and desertification.5
                Eating meat is inherently inefficient. Energy from the original food (e.g. wheat) is lost over the course of the animals' lifetime from their metabolic processes so we lose much of the original energy stored in the crop grown as animal feed. It is thought that more vegan diets could hold the key to combating world hunger7, as we could produce significantly more energy from the same amount of land. This argument is debatable: it implies that the world shares food across nations and continents. The idea however does have its merits, and the world cannot afford meat production to continue to rise at its current rate without a serious revolution of the entire process.
            In an age when we are dealing with world hunger and climate change, meat is a hindrance on more than one front. Not only are we being energy inefficient, but animals (particularly cows, pigs and chicken) contribute to the greenhouse effect themselves through the release of methane and other greenhouse gases.8 Some estimates place livestock as the origin of 50% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions (including land use, etc.)8a
All this is to say nothing of the processing and transportation that the meat products in our supermarkets go through before being bought and eaten. This involves fossil-fuels to transport them from farm to factory, to extract the meat and then to transport the meat to the shops.
           
            Several widespread health issues in the world can be attributed to meat, particularly in the developed world. The most notable and infamous of these is heart disease. It is thought that the current level of cholesterol intake, artificially high due to the huge supply of meat, is influential in the high rate of circulatory disease related deaths (158,084 in the UK in 2010 - 32% of all deaths9)10.
            Meat may also be linked to cancer11, a growing concern especially in the developed world. In 2010, there were 141,446 deaths from all cancers in the UK (29% of total deaths)9. While this figure is for all cancers, and there are many risk factors for different cancers, it was shown that even after controlling for other lifestyle risks, such as smoking, eating meat still increases the incidence of cancer in general.11
           
            It is for these reasons that there needs to be an alternative to meat. Vegetarian and vegan diets would be the most cost efficient and effective methods to adapt to but most people have grown too fond of meat to give it up. In vitro meat offers an alternative, which could possibly address all these issues. This meat would be grown in factory-style settings from stem cells.
           
            Stem cells can differentiate into many different types of cell thus they are mainly found in the development stages of organisms. There just one type of cell - the fertilized zygote - divides, matures and differentiates into a full organism with many different types of cell. These cells, found in the blastocyst stage of a mammalian embryo's development, are called embryonic stem cells. Because they can become any cell in the body, they are known as "pluripotent".  They can survive and divide outside the body in a tissue culture, and are the most flexible type of stem cell.12
            There is one other type of stem cell found naturally: adult stem cells. These can be classified into smaller groups, but all are distinct from embryonic stem cells. Unlike the latter, adult stem cells cannot differentiate into any cell type but are more prone to develop into one line of cells, for example a blood cell.They can still differentiate into more than one type of blood cell, but not something entirely different, for example a neuron.12 Adult stem cells  are grouped into epithelial, haematopoietic, and neural. Epithelial stem cells are the most likely to be useful in the production of in vitro meat, because the main component of meat is muscle. 13 Muscle however, is not the only component of meat, raising issues which will be dealt with in the discussion section.

Discussion

            Health concerns surrounding the consumption of what is essentially cloned meat were allayed in April 2010 with a risk assessment by the FDA into animal cloning, in which they state: "no … hazards were identified that could pose food consumption risks from ... clones."14
The remaining issues facing in vitro meat production are threefold: practical, economical and ethical. I address them in that order, as economics must follow the practicality, and a system needs to have been formulated  before it can be judged on moral grounds.

Practical       

In order to look at the difficulties of mass production of stem cell meat, it is important to first understand the process by which it is made on a small scale. Muscle has been kept alive ex vivo since 1912, when Alexis Carrel successfully grew tissues in his lab.15 Most current work is done in Holland, whose government has provided US $4 million for the venture., 4 times the prize that PETA was previously offering
There are two potential types of stem cells to use: the pluripotent embryonic stem cells, and satellite cells, specific types of adult stem cell that can fuse together and mature to form skeletal muscle. Here, I will focus on the embryonic stem cells because there may be need for more than one type of cell - meat is composed not just of myocytes, but adipocytes and blood vessels too.
            Muscle is generally formed before birth, where myoblasts, a more specific embryonic stem cell type, first differentiate into muscle cells, which then fuse together to form long, multi-nucleated muscle cells.16 The long myocytes arrange themselves first to be parallel in a 2-D structure, then in the 3-D shape of the muscle they will grow into. Thus the simplest way to produce meat from stem cells would be to use myoblasts. While it is an attractive concept use thigh myoblasts to produce thigh meat, and wing myoblasts to produce wing meat, in reality this will not happen. Meat gets its characteristic texture and taste not from the type of myoblast that makes it, but from use and structure.

Proliferation & differentiation:      
            The texture of muscle has always been the biggest hindrance in imitation meats, which heretofore have been largely limited to textured vegetable proteins. Much texture is due to the fibrous nature of muscle. Muscles can be split up into 5 basic units: protein filaments (grouped together in sarcomeres), myofibrils, myofibres, and fascicules. The protein filaments are either thick or thin, and can slide across each other, giving the motor action that is typical of muscles. The myofibrils are long chains of these filaments, contained within the cylindrical myofibres, the multi-nucleated cells formed from myoblasts.17 Fascicules are bundles of myofibres, and the biggest component of muscle. Because all of this comes from the progenitor myoblasts, to produce muscle containing those 5 basic units should be possible with the right culture and stimulation. This type of stem cell has already been grown in the lab and considered for production on a large scale (albeit for other purposes). The first step in the production involves getting as many stem cells from as few stem cells as possible. This can be achieved by stimulating proliferation, proved to be possible through the use of leukaemia inhibitory factor (LIF)18, a cytokine. However, as one of the drivers of this proposal is ecological and to reduce waste, as few chemicals as possible should be used. Alternatives to sera and stimulants are preferable to than using anything that has to be manufactured. An alternative to LIF presents itself in the form of the gene nanog, which is present in pluripotent embryonic stem cells, but only before differentiation. According to a recent study, this gene is at least partially responsible for maintaining pluripotency while cells continue to proliferate. Cells without nanog proliferate, but differentiate at the same time, thus the number of pluripotent cells decreases.19 By overexpressing this gene in stem cells, it is technically possible to produce as many cells as you want, provided that the stem cells are given the correct nutrients to survive. Because only one ‘batch’ of cells would need to be genetically modified to do this, the price could be regarded as a start-up cost. As the procedure is routinely performed within research studies, it is not cripplingly expensive.
            Once they have proliferated it is then important to make myoblasts differentiate into myofibres. It has been shown that this can be accelerated by stretching and then relaxing the cells; the area of myofibres increased by 40% over 8 days.21 With this in mind, the ideal system for their growth would include a way to stretch the cells as well as providing them with nutrients and encouraging them to divide.

Nutrition:
            The cells must also stay alive. Many stem cells can survive in fetal calf serum (FCS), which is the standard culture. Unfortunately, using this would be contrary to the original agenda in this particular situation, because FCS requires the slaughter of pregnant cows. The cows need to be alive to be impregnated, and reduction in the use of live animals is one of the aims of this research. Breeding cows only to kill them when they are pregnant would raise new ethical issues and would not solve the maltreatment of the animals and workers in the meat industry. Thus, in order for in vitro meat to be successful, an alternative to FCS would have to be developed. There is already pressure to replace it in cell culture for these reasons and also because of the risk of contamination if the foetus contained microbes or pathogens, or if the abattoir was not sterile.20 Each type of stem cell requires specific sera to enable proliferation and differentiation. Media for turkey breast, goldfish, and porcine cells have been found, but these also contain animal derived substances such as chicken serum. Development of non-animal related substances that stimulate growth and differentiation while providing stem cells with necessary nutrients is a prerequisite to the use of  in vitro meat as described.

Structure & texture:
            The tissue culture, once it begins differentiating, needs a way of organising itself into the 2D and 3D structure. A scaffold needs to fulfil several criteria: it should be flexible enough that the muscles can contract (essential to muscle growth, particularly for the texture of the meat), have a sufficiently large surface area to promote attachment (muscle cells are require anchorage in order to grow) and aid diffusion. It should also be able to be separated from the finished product easily, or alternatively be edible. In vivo, muscles grow according to the structure they are on and the blood supply to them. It was found that in order to produce muscle in myofibres and fascicules, the myoblasts needed to be cultured on something with a stiffness that simulated healthy, non-damaged muscle.22 The two main proposals currently are either small edible beads or a porous sponge, both made from collagen, and the sponge derived from cows.23 As with FCS, the second method is inappropriate if it cannot be replicated without the use of animals. It is also much more difficult to retrieve the cells from once they have diffused into the sponge. Therefore, of these two options, the beads are the better.. Even with the beads, it would be hard to stretch the cells, particularly on an industrial scale. One solution suggested is to synthesise spheres of the same size and porosity, but which expand and contract as a response to environmental factors, like pH.25 So far, all in vitro meat research has been geared towards unstructured meat, useful for mince and patty-based foods such as burgers or meatballs. The collagen bead structure is useable for anything needing only muscle cells, but if cultured meat is ever to be considered a real alternative to meat, there needs to be more variety in the form of more ‘natural’ meat cuts. Examples are chicken breasts, or even a steak. These both have other types of cells (e.g. adipocytes and blood vessels). The second of these is worth focusing on; and highlights another hindrance to the production of meat from stem cells. The importance of blood vessels may seem trivial, but in fact they serve a very specific purpose in the body during myogenesis and later throughout the life of the organism and its muscles. The purpose of the blood itself will be discussed later, but first it is important to understand what needs to change to the scaffold before it is possible to grow complex meat structures. Muscle cells need to be within 0.5nm of a nutrient supply in order to survive, which means that in a 3D structure there needs to be an oxygen carrier that can diffuse between the cells, or a vascular system. In 2D sheets, this is not a problem - the whole sheet can be submerged in the medium, and all cells will be exposed to it. Therefore, without significant advances in the blood vessel synthesis, in vitro meat will be limited to flat sheets of muscle that have to be pressed together.
            Adipocytes (fat cells) also contribute to the texture. In the patty meat method, it would not matter where the fat was grown as long as it was grown in the right proportions to give the meat the desired texture, because all the material is simply pressed together. Because of this, the fat could be grown in a separate culture, then added at the end.

Blood:
Blood is important for muscles in several ways. Firstly, blood supplies muscles with the glucose and oxygen needed for respiration and takes away the waste products. Tissue culture can supply nutrition, and waste products can be removed through letting them run off or diffuse into the air. However, oxygen delivery cannot be performed by the medium itself. This can either be done through an artificially produced haemoglobin or by using perfluorochemicals (PFCs). PFCs, while easy to produce, are not broken down by any known process (the carbon-fluorine bond is very strong), so remain in the environment as a persistent pollutant, and reports suggest that they do serious damage to several organs in animals.24 With this in mind, artificial haemoglobins (or similar) are the more appropriate substances to use. These have already been produced from genetically modified plants and microbes,23 but no studies have been done on an industrial scale.
The second function of blood vessels in meat is to provide texture and to encourage the muscles to grow in a particular way. More advanced types of meat (non-patty based meat) would require vessels, and that is one reason why it is so difficult to make anything more advanced than a sheet of muscle. An area of research that could lead to more complex structures is vasculogenesis, the production of blood vessels without the presence of other vessels already there. This focuses around angioblasts, another type of stem cell. Technology for the use of vasculogenesis in tissue culture is not yet being researched, so this cannot be performed in the short term.

Health issues:
          Two health issues that present themselves are the content of the meat and the sterility of the factories. If the meat is to help combat the health issues related to our diets, changing what the meat is made of could prove vital. By altering the DNA of the progenitor cells, meat could be made that contains less omega 6 and more omega 3 fatty acids. In the western world, the ratio of these two is in favour of omega 6, rather than omega-3, which we cannot manufacture but improves our health.26
            The second health issue is the risk of infection. Factories would need to be kept free from pathogens in order to keep the meat safe for human consumption. This could be achieved by using antibiotics, but that could select for super resistant strains, as happened with MRSA. A better system would be to vet the cells that came in, and keep them in an argon atmosphere so that any aerobic microbes would be killed. The muscle would continue to draw its oxygen from the oxygen carrier, not from the air, so would survive. This suggestion does not account for any pathogens that live in the culture, so the meat would have to be tested after production as well. To minimise risks, hygiene in the factories would need to be kept to a very high standard and any contact with the culture, scaffold and cells kept to a minimum.

Economical:

            From an economical perspective, the implementation of a scheme like this would require massive investment. Harvesting the original cells can be done from a simple biopsy, and bears negligible cost. Genetic modification may be more expensive, but if  successful it should be a cost paid very infrequently. The real expense rests in the medium and the scaffold. Both are consumed in the process, so need replenishing. As mentioned above, there is not yet a suitable serum for the growth of the cells, and the scaffold is a very specific structure that cannot be substituted by anything cheaper Thus it is incredibly unlikely for meat to be grown in vitro on anything larger than a laboratory scale in the foreseeable future. Even if both serum and scaffold were inexpensive and available, a vast start-up cost would be necessary to build the facilities needed: nothing could be retrofitted for such a particular purpose.
            Another issue to consider is whether consumers would want to eat something cultured in a lab. In February of this year, 68% of participants in a poll in the Guardian said that they would eat stem cell meat;27 it has more opposition than in vivo meat, but a significant proportion of the public appear to be accepting of it.

Ethical:

            Ethically, there are not many problems with in vitro meat. PETA backs the concept, describing, it as the morally acceptable alternative to eating meat grown on an animal. The issues arise from the harvesting of cells and the use of animal sera. In order to obtain embryonic stem cells, embryos have to be killed. This is questionable when the embryos are human, but there are fewer objections for animals. Each animal embryo would be used to feed millions. Harvesting cells from adult animals would have to be done under anaesthetic and with sterile tools, but is essentially no different to surgery, so again there is no issue. The one moral problem is with animal sera, which has been discussed above. Collection of FCS and other media from animals is often done unethically in abattoirs, which is one of the problems in vitro meat could tackle, if the cells were less dependent on substances such as FCS. In order for in vitro meat to be considered truly ethical, it must use synthetic alternatives to these sera.

Conclusion

            In vitro meat from stem cells, while physically possible to produce in the small scale, cannot be economically scaled up to make a large enough amount of meat for it to be economically viable. Before that is possible, several advances need to be made. Firstly, there needs to be an alternative to using animal sera in the cell culture. Without this, in vitro meat will be both unethical and impractical. Secondly, a scaffolding material must be created that is porous, edible, and stretches in response to a stimulus that does not affect the meat. Thirdly, without a way to create functioning blood vessels, including circulation of a natural or synthetic blood, in vitro meat will not be able to progress past 2D sheets of meat that need to be pressed together to create patty-based meat products. On this basis, in vitro meat is unlikely to be either an alternative or a supplement to in vivo meat.

References

1. The issues, by PETA
http://www.peta.org.uk/issues/

2. Essex slaughterhouse exposé finds 'unbearable cruelty and suffering', report by Animal aid (2010),

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/NEWS/news_slaughter//2331//


3. Migrant and agency workers mistreated in UK meat and poultry industry, according to Commission report, article by the Daily Telegraph (2010).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/7432006/Migrant-and-agency-workers-mistreated-in-UK-meat-and-poultry-industry-according-to-Commission-report.html

4.Meat Production Continues to Rise, report by the World Watch Institute.
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5443

5. Livestock's Long Shadow report by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the UN (2006), p.66
http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM

7. L. Baroni et al. "Evaluating the Environmental Impact of Various Dietary Patterns Combined with Different Food Prodution Systems," European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, February 2007

8. Livestock's long shadow, p. 80

8a. R. Goodland, J. Anhang (2009), Livestock and Climate Change: what if the key actors in climate change are… cows, pigs and chickens? A report by the World Watch Institute
http://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf

9. UK National Office for Statistics (2010), Death registrations summary tables, England and Wales

10. R. Sinha et al. (2009) Meat Intake and Mortality. In Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 169, 6, 562-571

11. M Thorogood et al. (1994) Risk of death from cancer and ischaemic heart disease in meat and non-meat eaters. In BMJ vol. 308, 6945

12. stem cell. (2012). In Encyclopædia Britannica. 
http://school.eb.co.uk/eb/article-272796

13. R.A. Lawrie (2006), Lawrie’s meat science 7th Ed., Woodhead Publishing Limited.


14. Animal Cloning: A risk assessment by the FDA
http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/AnimalCloning/UCM055489


15. A. Carrel, On the Permanent Life of Tissues Outside of the Organism (1912), JEM vol. 15, 5, 516-528 

16. D.Yaffe and M.Feldman (1965), The formation of hybrid multinucleated muscle fibers from myoblasts of different origin. In Developmental Biology, Vol. 11, 2, 300-317

17. The Structure of Meat, notes by the University of Guelph
http://www.aps.uoguelph.ca/~swatland/ch5_0.htm

18. L. Austin, A.W. Burgess (1991), Stimulation of myoblast proliferation by leukaemia inhibiting factor and other cytokines. In Journal of the Neurological Sciences Vol. 101, 2 193-197

19. I Chambers et al (2003), Functional expression cloning of nanog, a pluripotency sustaining factor in embryonic stem cells. In Cell Vol.113, 5, 643-655

20.Serum free media for cell culture, a report by Focus on Alternatives (2009)
http://www.frame.org.uk/dynamic_files/foa_fcs_free_table_may09.pdf

21. C. A. Powell et al (2002), Mechanical stimulation improves tissue-engineered human skeletal muscle. In American Journal of Physiology Vol. 283, 5, 1557-1565


22. A. J. Engler et al (2004), Myotubes differentiate optimally on substrates with tissue-like stiffness. In Journal of Cell Biology, Vol. 166, 6, 877-887
                                                                                               
23. I. Datar, M. Betti, Possibilities for an in vitro meat production system. In  Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, Vol. 11, 1, 13-22

24. J. Lee (2003), EPA Orders companies to examine effects of chemicals. In NY Times,
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/15/science/epa-orders-companies-to-examine-effects-of-chemicals.html

25. P.D. Edelman et al., In vitro cultured meat production. In Tissue engineering, Vol. 11, 5-6, 659-662

26. 2004, Give Livestock the Omega-3 Gene. In New Scientist, 2433, 18

27. Guardian.co.uk (2012), Would you eat lab-grown meat? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/poll/2012/feb/20/lab-grown-meat-test-tube-burger?INTCMP=SRCH

No comments:

Post a Comment