Title here
Summary here
Language & Terminology
Principles
Use technically accurate language accessible to audiences from diverse backgrounds. Avoid polarizing terms. Instead, choose neutral words that convey equivalent information and clarity. Resist temptations to rally likeminded peers using language that may alienate or reduce resonance among others. Support advancement of scientific and nutritional literacy around protein.
General
Common terms that are used and misused in a wide range of contexts.
Protein
Protein is a nutrient – not a food
| Usage | Use with sufficient technical accuracy. Exclude colloquial usages. Avoid referecing material that confounds scientific and colloquial meanings of the term. If necessary to reference such usages, add clarity where it is needed. |
| Notes | Protein is a scientific term with two distinct meanings. In nutrition, it refers to one of three macronutrients along with carbohydrates and fats. In chemistry, it refers to a class of molecule. This toolkit refers only to protein the nutrient. Despite being a well-defined term, "protein" has emerged as a popular colloquialism used simply to refer to foods that are rich in protein. Although such usages may be benign in private, informal contexts, failure to differentiate between scientific and colloquial meanings of the term can be problematic in more formal and public-facing communications. For instance:
|
| Examples |
|
Alternative
By definition not default or mainstream
| Usage: | Use only with sufficient context and specificity. Exclude from branding and prominent copy writing. Avoid trend- or community-specific usages. |
| Notes: | "Alternative protein" has emerged as a popular term describing products developed to imitate or replace animal-based foods such as meat, dairy, and eggs. It is further used to describe the broader industry surrounding such products, including the technologies, organizations, and companies carrying out related work. Additionally, because of the likely sustainability and animal welfare advantages of such products, "alternative protein" has become a focal point and defining term for activist and alternative lifestyle communities. Due to the social and often vocal, publicity-seeking nature of such groups, the term may also refer broadly to a social movement. In practice, the "alternative protein" industry and social movement are deeply intertwined, creating a complex set of social, professional, and financial incentivies fueling its growth, while strengthening opposition from competing industries and ideologies. When used with sufficient context and specificity, "alternative protein" is neither a source of ambiguitiy nor socially divisive connotations. For instance, in the context of discussion regarding animal-based protein sources or animal-derived proteins, the meanings of "alternative protein sources" or "alternative proteins" are clear and without ambiguity. However, popular usage often fails to provide such context or specificity, instead leveraging its buzzword status as a signal or rallying call to likeminded peers. Such usage diverges from this toolkit's principles for a couple of reasons:
The obviousness of this contradiction offers one of the clearest examples of revealed intent diverging from stated intent, as it is self-evident that a strategic approach to achieving mainstream adoption of anything would preclude branding it as "alternative." This usage therefore reveals a different priority: since the "alternative" positioning is actually counterproductive toward the stated goal, it demonstrates willingness to sacrifice such progress in favor of other rewards gained from alignment with a community, in this case one that champions an alternative or counterculutre positioning. Accurate and conscious usage of terms such as "alternative" does not demand lingusitic puriusm or inflexibility. This toolkit merely presrcibes basic critical thinking and a strategic approach to communications in order to help remove polarization and political risk from topics related to protein and emerging protein technologies. |
| Examples |
|
Traditional
The opposite of modern or novel
| Usage: | Exclude usages that aim to evoke an emotional response or elicit confirmation bias in audiences. Where possible, choose more neutral terms, such as "conventional." Ensure empirical accuracy if referring to historical dietary patterns or agricultural practices. |
| Notes: | "Traditional" is a nontechnical term used frequently in communications around food and agriculture, dietary patterns, and culinary activities. In many cases, it connotes and evokes positive associations: traditions are often a source of comfort; they are time-tested and refined; they represent cultural authenticity; they demonstrate awareness of one's ancestors or origins; and they can be a source of common ground and social harmony. This loaded nature of the term makes it popular among communicators for a number of reasons:
The most common example of such usage occurs in reference to historical dietary patterns and protein compositions. While popular opinion tends to believe that animal-based protein diets are traditional, empirical evidence shows that Communicators For instance, communications about protein frequently contrast "alternative proteins" with "traditional" proteins. In the case of protein sources that are still under development or have never gained significant adoption in dietary history, such usage Another popular usage is among food service providers. Many restaurants bill themselves as specializing in traditional cuisine. In this case, the term's ambiguity may allow the claim to have merit, as long as it serves dishes that were consumed in the context of some tradition. However, restaurant cuisine is likely to focus on the richest and most decadent of traditional dishes, such as those consumed only during special and festive occasions or rituals. Consuming such foods more frequently or on a daily basis could only be described as modern. Here we encounter again a problem of equivocation - confounding meanings of traditional in refernce to specific dishes vs a cuisine or diet. However, it can still be misleading. Usage of traditional to elicit confirmation bias in audiences can also be a form of the elementary logical fallacy knows as the appeal to tradition. This toolkit is designed to encourage critical thinking, which implies a basic ability to evaluate whether things make sense based upon merit, not historical time or level of adoption. Many traditions have been outlawed, and many persist despite . Becasue of the, communicators lean on it to or to (unconsciously) signal their feelings and sympathies. For instance, "we need to shift from traditional to alternative proteins" paraphrases a common statement in the "alternative protein" industry and social movement. its incorrect usage In public health, traditions can also be a source. No intervention can be successful if it doesn't align with local customs and traditions. Usage of traditional that aims to evoke an emotional response or which is empirically inaccurate diverge from this toolkit's principles of encouraging critical thinking and technical accuracy in communications about protein. "Traditional" and "modern" should only be used with awareness of their connotations and exploitation, and with special attenion given to empirical accuracy. |
Protein Industries
| Usage: | In reference to the production of protein-rich foods. |
| Notes: | The protein industries refers broadly to the production of protein-rich foods. These include legumes, animal-based meat and dairy products, plant-based meat and dairy products, cell-cultured meat and dairy products, mycoprotein, algal proteins, and protein-rich foods produced by other microorganisms or through technologies such as plant molecular farming. It some cases, it may also include the production of foods that are not protein rich, but which serve as substitutes for common protein-rich foods. One example is oat milk, which is often used in place of other plant- or animal-based milks. It should also be noted that wheat is not generally considered a protein-rich food, despite it being the world's primary source of protein in terms of grams/capita/day. |
Vegan
| Usage: | Strictly exclude |
| Notes: | The term vegan is used by activists and marketers in efforts to appeal to the vegan community. It is also often used by consumers to position animal-friendly products and nonviolent lifestyles as extreme, highly differentiated, or socially undesirable. Due to the term's polarizing nature and association with publicity-seeking activism, it is not used in public-facing contexts by people or organizations working toward progress on issues related to animal welfare and the environment. Revealed intent: Any time the term vegan is used in a public-facing context to discuss issues related to animal welfare or sustainability, it represents a tradeoff prioritizing the career or social interests of the communicator at the cost of alienating broader audiences from seriously considering those topics. |
Technologies
Terms used to describe specific technologies and protein sources.
Cell culture
Debates about which term should be used to describe foods grown from cell culture have played out on social media and in public forums such as. Many of these discussions are aimed at publicity or public expression of alliegance to certain factions or social alliances within the “altnernative protein” community. While caught up in such social activities and posturing, these discussions have failed to examine core questions and considerations about such terminology. Instead, they merely reflect the social media and publicity-seeking incentives of the “alternative protein” industry and social movement.
What those discussion have failed to recognize is that in order to gain widespread adoption, the term’s intrinsic meaning does not need to be perfect–it only needs to meet minimal requirements for technical accuracy, simplicity, and palatability for a diverse range of stakeholders. What matters much more is the term’s extrinsic meaning–that which comes from how it is used and understood. This layer of meaning is where connontations are formed, and is determined by who uses the term, how they use it, and in what contexts.
The most popular term currently in use is “cultivated,” which would score well for intrinsic factors. However, extrinsically, it has connotations of exrtemeist activism and alternative lifestyles due to the alliances that have formed around it. As a result, “cultivated” is used by those for “cellular agriculture” or “alternative protein” as a social movement,
Because of the dynamic nature of words in general, and especially connotations of new terms, this toolkit does not prescribe any specific term. Instead, it provides a list of options and considerations for each. In general, usage that is in line with this toolkit favors those with neutral connotations. Multiple terms may be used to facilitate flow.
| Term | Notes |
|---|---|
| Cell-based, cell-cultured, cultured | These terms have similar levels of palatability, as they don't intrinsically carry any implications that could be offensive to any stakeholder. Cell-based scores lower than the others on technical accuracy but higher on simplicity. Cultured is more accurate |
| Cell-based, cell-cultured, cultured | These terms have similar levels of palatability, as they don't intrinsically carry any implications that could be offensive to any stakeholder. Cell-based scores lower than the others on technical accuracy but higher on simplicity. Cultured is more accurate |
Cellular agriculture
Microbial
Fermentation
Additional notes and considerations
Words are dynamic. Their definitions, and even pronunciations, can vary over time and across geographies and contexts. Cellular agriculture, once a neutral term used to describe a new industry, has failed to resist the grip of modern social insticnts and incentives. What those in the cellular agriculture industry and advocacy fields fail to consider in all their pontificating about terminology is that