Erin Patinkin

Is cultivated meat competing with conventional beef? As cattlemen lobbies are trying to block protein innovation to protect their subsidies, an important piece in the The Wall Street Journal on rising beef prices and historically tight cattle supply in the US reminds us of the importance to diversify our protein supply. The US cattle herd is at its lowest level in decades, and herd rebuilding cycles take years. At the same time, global demand for high quality protein continues to grow. This is not simply a price story. It is a structural supply story. Building long term food system resilience will require diversification. Conventional agriculture remains foundational. At the same time, complementary production systems that offer greater predictability and efficiency should be part of the discussion. Livestock systems are deeply exposed to land constraints, climate volatility, feed costs, and long biological cycles. When supply tightens, the system cannot adjust quickly. Protein is not just a consumer category. It is strategic infrastructure. The question is how we build systems that can deliver stability, quality, and access in a world where demand is rising and resources are constrained. https://bit.ly/3OzYyX6

15

3 Comments

Thanks Nick Bradley 🌱🥩 and Future-Proof Group Media for this very candid article about the differentiated and value-added cell-cultivated seafood company we are building at BlueNalu, and highlighting my recent Future of Foods podcast hosted by Alex Crisp. There's an outstanding agenda during the upcoming Cultured Meat Symposium and The Future of Protein Production conferences, being held in Chicago on February 24-25. I look forward to presenting our value proposition and latest updates at BlueNalu, learning from the insights that others will be sharing, and connecting with everyone there.

37

2 Comments

Six years ago, I was convinced urban vertical farming would be a big player in food security. The industry has proven me wrong many times since. This week, I was reminded of that in a conversation Boardy set up for me with someone bringing a vertical farming opportunity to investors. I'm not often cynical at the start of a call. This time I was. The early adopter and market leader in the vertical farming space in the USA, 80 Acre Farms, which had raised over $350 million, ceased operations in August. It joins over a dozen other vertical farms that have raised a cumulative $3.5 billion that are either bankrupt or in insolvency. Vertical farming companies in Singapore have succumbed to the same fate. Two here in Singapore closed in the last two years, even as one new one costing $80 million opened. Demand was never the problem. None of them could grow food cheaply enough to compete with traditional agriculture on price. LOIs don't fix that either. Without unit profitability at scale, trying to fill those orders means going out of business faster. The best counterpoint I heard was to grow a premium crop that sells at a high multiple. Fair enough, it's the more compelling version. The questions stay the same, though: yield per unit of space, energy use, cost of goods, profit. So I've gone back to what I know. These days I'm working with farmers who grow a single crop, showing them how to add a complementary second crop in the same area without chemical fertiliser or pesticides. More food going into the supply chain, and a second income for the farmer if the first crop has a bad season. Remediate the soil with natural ingredients, use natural herbicides/pesticides, and use naturally captured water to keep ground moisture levels constant, and Mother Nature will create strong plants that produce larger yields. Without going into specifics, A 10% yield increase across one crop, in a specific region or country, is at least 1,000 times more than you'll ever get from dozens of the largest possible vertical farms. I understand that my argument is not helpful in a country like Singapore, where space is limited and hence, it’s hoped that vertical farming will reduce its dependence on food imports. In general, though, when I reflect on my journey on this subject, it's funny how things evolve. What's something in food or climate you were sure about five years ago and have since changed your mind on? #foodsecurity #impactinvesting #atomsnotbits #agriculture

10

5 Comments

Regenerative Organic Certified products saw 22% growth in buyers in 2025. Fair Trade grew 10.7%. USDA Organic 6.6% (Source Food Navigator). The consumer is waking up, and fast. What's driving this? ROC isn't just organic with better marketing. It goes further on three things most labels ignore: soil biology (not just what you don't spray, but what you actively build), animal welfare, and farmer fairness. The core principle is quite simple: healthier soil, healthier plants, means healthier food. Brands using ROC are going further and raising the bar. They're conducting third-party lab analyses of nutrient density and publishing the results. Philosopher Foods is showing measurable boosts in antioxidants and metabolomics between conventional, organic, and regenerative. Not marginal. Dramatic. That changes the economics. You can charge a premium when you can prove what's in the product, not just what's not in it. "Organic" tells you what was avoided. ROC, backed by lab data, tells you what was gained. The measurement layer is what makes this investable. Without it, regenerative is a story. With it, it's a margin. I know my personal AI assistant "Bev" will be hunting for foods like this going forward. I've programmed this as a hard rule: "Prioritise foods with higher nutrient quality and density, ensure there is data-backed evidence." #agrihealth #roc #regenerative #healthyfood #foodsystem https://lnkd.in/ex3wFeca

27

1 Comment