Connect with us

Tech

From plant-based diapers to bioplastics: How marketing took over the baby aisle

Published

on

Nothing has made me appreciate the sheer scale and power of targeted advertising like having children. Months before the births of both my kids, it felt like every ad I encountered wanted to sell me baby products. And on seemingly every product were the same two words in bold letters: plant-based.

I’m not kidding. Diapers, baby wipes, teething rings, bath toys — it’s all plant-based these days. Once I saw the phrase on baby products, I started to notice it everywhere. There are plant-based foods, of course (like Impossible burgers and Beyond sausage). There’s plant-based protein, which is kind of like the plant-based meat only less meaty and now showing up in weird places like breakfast cereal. And once you leave the grocery store, you can find plant-based cosmetics, cleaning products, toothbrushes, sneakers, phone cases, and yoga mats. Don’t forget the plant-based packaging to wrap it all up.

It wasn’t immediately clear to me what plants did to deserve the spotlight here. I knew that plant-based foods tend to be better for people and for the environment. But was the same true for plant-based plastics, fabrics, and chemicals?

Still, as a dad trying to keep my kids from harm, I hoped for the best. I bought the plant-based diapers, wipes, and toys. On their labels, alongside the term “plant-based” were words like “eco” and “food-grade,” which signaled two big things to me as a consumer: safe and sustainable. The vast majority of plastics, for instance, are made from fossil fuels, which are damaging to everyone, and microplastics, the tiny synthetic particles left over as plastic breaks down, are showing up in our water supply and our bodies.

Advertisement
  • The “plant-based” label has started showing up on everything from diapers to phone cases in recent years, signaling a product is “safe” and “sustainable” even when there’s no evidence for that.
  • The term is essentially unregulated and poorly defined, so “plant-based” products can still contain harmful chemicals.
  • Treat “plant-based” as a starting point, not a guarantee. Look for products that are transparent about their ingredients or that have credible certifications, like organic.

On the other hand, I’ve seen how brands prey on consumers’ anxieties and use greenwashing to make them seem healthier and more sustainable. Is the boom in plant-based products more of the same? I decided to find out.

Don’t you dare call it vegan

You can trace the term plant-based back to the early 1980s, when a nutritional biochemist named Thomas Colin Campbell was presenting a paper to the National Institutes of Health research grant committee. It was about the role of nutrition in cancer and the benefits of consuming more vegetables, fruit, and grains, rather than meat, but Campbell thought calling the diet vegetarian would be polarizing to the committee. “My solution was to choose ‘plant-based’ for lack of a better word,” Campbell later wrote. He later expanded the description of the diet to “whole food, plant-based.”

The term slowly entered the mainstream in the decades that followed, but Campbell has said it really took off after the success of his 2005 book The China Study. The book is based on a study of the lifestyles of 6,500 Chinese people and linked plant-based diets to lower rates of cancer. It was only a couple years later that Michael Pollan coined his now famous mantra, “Eat food, not too much, mostly plants,” in a New York Times Magazine story that he later adapted into the bestseller The Omnivore’s Dilemma. This is also broadly when we saw the rise of flexitarianism, the diet that’s mostly plants but allows for a little meat or fish.

Plant-based products invaded the grocery store in the 2010s. While labeling something as “vegetarian” or “vegan” might turn some consumers away, the plant-based moniker offered the perfect mix of natural and approachable. After all, who doesn’t like plants? Following a significant rise in the number of new food and drink products labeled as plant-based between 2012 and 2018, the number of plant-based packaged goods increased by 302 percent from 2018 to 2022.

Advertisement

The jump from food to all kinds of consumer products happened for several converging reasons around this time.There was the federal government’s push for more biobased products through the expanded Farm Bill of 2018, as well as the bioplastic industry’s newfound ability to scale up its production. More brands bet on plant-based branding (LEGO released its first plant-based pieces, which were made of sugarcane-based polyethylene, that same year). In 2020, Pampers brought the trend to the mainstream baby market with its Pure diapers, which had plant-based liners.

All of these plant-based products are supposedly engineered to be better in some way. Plant-based cosmetics that are supposed to be better for your skin (although not as good as human-based cosmetics apparently). Plant-based cleaners are supposed to be better for the air quality in your home. Plant-based packaging is supposed to be better for the planet.

The problem is that “plant-based” doesn’t have an agreed-upon definition (nor does “better”), and the label isn’t regulated in any way. When you see something bearing the “certified organic” or “Fair Trade Certified” seal, you know that it’s met a strict set of requirements established by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Fair Trade USA, respectively. But there’s nothing stopping a company from slapping “plant-based” on its packaging, just like there are no regulations limiting the use of the terms “natural” or “green.” In 2025, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) released draft guidance on “plant-based” labeling, but those recommendations are nonbinding.

“I wonder if ‘plant-based’ is a new ‘natural,’ because saying something is natural has obviously been played out,” Josée Johnston, a sociology professor at the University of Toronto, told Vox. “Nobody takes that seriously anymore.”

Advertisement

Plant-based items aren’t necessarily appealing to consumers just because we think they’re good. They also represent the absence of bad. The label makes you believe that because an item isn’t made of conventional plastic, it must be free of the microplastics that might invade your bloodstream and settle into your brain. Surely it won’t take centuries to decompose in a landfill.

But just as products billed as “natural” aren’t necessarily free of artificial ingredients, products marketed as plant-based are full of things that aren’t plants — some of which are quite dangerous. They can include things like PFAS, which are known as forever chemicals because they break down slowly and accumulate in the body, which are linked to serious health problems, like cancer and weakened immune systems among children. Chemicals in plant-based products can also emit volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, which are a form of air pollution that can cause respiratory problems in the short term and, in the long term, also cancer.

Plastic that’s plant-based rather than petroleum-based sounds like it would be biodegradable, too. But the most popular bioplastic, known as polylactic acid, or PLA, actually requires specific industrial composting conditions to break down efficiently. In other words, you can’t just dump bioplastics into your backyard compost bin and expect them to fertilize your garden. If you put a PLA-based plastic bottle in your garden, it actually could take centuries to decompose.

Shifting to these plant-based materials can have positive effects. In general, using bioproducts over fossil fuel-based products can help lower emissions and reduce landfill waste, when managed properly. But they also come with climate consequences of their own. For example, growing plants requires less land than livestock, but it still takes up a lot of land. Meanwhile, if bioplastics aren’t composted in a particular way, they act like petroleum-based plastic in landfills and the environment. They don’t break down, but they do produce methane, a powerful greenhouse gas.

Advertisement

None of this necessarily means you should avoid plant-based products. It just takes some extra work to know what’s in them — and what to do with them when you’re done.

How to make sense of plant-based marketing

It’s hard navigating the world while watching it burn. Many people, rightly, want to do their part to make things better, but it’s easy to feel overwhelmed and powerless. When companies offer us products that make us feel better about all kinds of things — our carbon footprint, our health, our safety — they are really selling us a sense of agency. You buy organic produce, because you’re worried about how the conventional stuff was produced. You buy bioplastics, because you think they’re less likely to break down into microplastics. You buy plant-based diapers, because you think the regular ones will harm your baby. Norah MacKendrick, a sociologist at Rutgers, calls this cautious consumerism and says that it’s not a bad thing.

“Americans know, on some level, that the ingredients in the products on their store shelves, from baby food to diapers, haven’t been carefully vetted for their impacts on health — not by any governmental body or by the companies themselves,” she told Vox.

Advertisement

“People do have a sense that the way we’re consuming is not sustainable,” said Johnston, the University of Toronto professor. “They’re more aware of plastics in the environment, plastics in water, and so I think they’re going to be drawn to products that offer them a way out, a way to manage that dissonance and discomfort in everyday life.”

It’s frustrating, then, that the plant-based moniker is functionally useless. The onus is on shoppers, often women, to do the research and figure out which products live up to their implied promise of being healthy or environmentally friendly or simply not as harmful as the conventional thing.

Plant-based products are no panacea. They’re also not necessarily bad products. In terms of measurable impact, however, there’s still a lot we don’t know.

There is a mountain of evidence that plant-based foods are better for the environment. Transitioning everyone from meat-based to plant-based diets, for instance, could reduce diet-related land use by 76 percent and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 50 percent. Meanwhile, consuming a whole foods, plant-based diet can reduce the risk of heart disease by 25 percent, according to one meta-analysis. Michael Pollan’s mantra holds up.

Advertisement

Things get a bit trickier when it comes to other plant-based products, and even more difficult when it comes to items for babies. When you’re looking at the environmental impact, there’s good evidence that plant-based plastics, which are often made of corn or sugarcane, tend to have a smaller carbon footprint and to be more biodegradable. But that corn or sugarcane has to be grown somewhere, which means using resources like land and water. Plus, as mentioned above, PLAs require industrial processes for proper composting. If you just bury a “compostable” plant-based plastic fork in your backyard, there’s a chance it will decompose about as slowly as petroleum-based plastic. Plant-based plastics may also include additives, including bisphenol A or (BPA) or phthalates, which can disrupt your endocrine system.

Similar patterns pop up when you’re talking about plant-based textiles, beauty products, and cleaners. They’re probably better than their conventional counterparts, but there are caveats. Some “vegan leather,” for instance, might get billed as plant-based but is actually just regular, petroleum-based plastic. (The New York Times called this rebranding “a marketing masterstroke meant to suggest environmental virtue.”) A lot of plant-based fabric is actually man-made cellulosic fibers (MMCFs), like viscose, rayon, or lyocell, which are energy intensive to produce.

All of these products come with their own set of health concerns. Plant-based textiles can be treated with PFAS for waterproofing (vegan leather is a particularly bad offender). Plant-based cosmetics and cleaners can be made with fragrances and chemicals that emit VOCs. And even though something is plant-based, it could still contain allergens or irritants. We also still don’t fully understand what microplastics are doing to our bodies, but plant-based plastics can get micro-sized, too. Research shows that bioplastics degrade and produce micro- and nanoscale pollution, just like conventional plastics, and they present new problems because we know even less about what they do to humans and to the environment. (If you’re still confused about recycling plastic, which is warranted because it’s confusing, check out this guide.)

You might read all of this and assume everything is awful and dangerous, which is fair. But I look at it as evidence that all products are more complicated than a single ingredient, whether that’s petroleum or corn. It can be intimidating to wade through the alphabet soup of chemicals and certifications to know what’s safe, according to Sheela Sathyanarayana, a pediatrician who runs a lab at Seattle Children’s Hospital studying how chemicals affect children.

Advertisement

“This is very hard at the individual consumer level,“ said Sathyanarayana, who points to the Environmental Working Group as a good resource. “But overall there is not one space that talks both about ecological sustainability and chemical human safety together (that I know of).”

If you’re cautious about how that product may affect the planet, you, or your baby, take a closer look. Seek out companies that not only say they use good ingredients, but also say they avoid harmful ingredients. Here’s a list of brands that claim they avoid PFAS, for example. You can also look for independent certifications, like OEKO-TEX Standard for textiles, as well as government programs, like Safer Choice from the Environmental Protection Agency or BioPreferred from the USDA for authoritative information. Again, the term plant-based is not regulated, so it alone is not a good guide.

I’ll confess, I bought some plant-based diapers from a brand called Dyper. They were billed as non-toxic, chlorine free, charcoal-enhanced, stuffed with wood pulp from responsibly managed forests, and theoretically compostable. The problem was that they were stiff as a board, and they leaked. They also cost more than double what I’d been buying for my kid — roughly a dollar a diaper versus less than 50 cents. If I wanted to compost the dirty diapers, I’d have to bag them up and call for a truck to come pick them up and take them to a special industrial composting facility.

It just shows how much work it takes to be a cautious consumer. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it. If you see something’s plant-based, that might catch your attention, but dig into the details to figure out just how good that product is for the environment or for you. If you’re shopping for a baby, you’ll want to be extra careful to look out for certain chemicals, especially phthalates, PFAS, and VOCs. But admittedly, this is especially challenging when it comes to diapers; companies don’t have to list the ingredients in their diapers (except in New York, where it recently became required by law).

Advertisement

In your quest for safe and sustainable products, there is ultimately the option of just buying less stuff or buying secondhand. That’s not an option with disposable diapers, of course, but it’s a great course of action when it comes to clothes, furniture, and home goods.

When all else fails, try buying something that’s completely, verifiably natural. Lately, I’ve been seeing a lot more natural rubber baby products. There are teethers, bath toys, and pacifiers. Natural rubber is just tree sap, so it seems safe enough. Natural rubber can also grow mold, however. If only anything could be simple.

A version of this story was also published in the User Friendly newsletter. Sign up here so you don’t miss the next one!

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Tech

What Is A Computer? | Hackaday

Published

on

On the podcast, [Tom] and I were talking about the new generation of smartphones which are, at least in terms of RAM and CPU speed, on par with a decent laptop computer. If so, why not just add on a screen, keyboard, and mouse and use it as your daily driver? That was the question posed by [ETA Prime] in a video essay and attempt to do so.

Our consensus was that it’s the Android operating system holding it back. Some of the applications you might want to run just aren’t there, and on the open side of the world, even more are missing. Is the platform usable if you can’t get the software you need to get your work done?

But that’s just the computer-as-a-tool side of the equation. The other thing a computer is, at least to many of our kind of folk, is a playground. It’s a machine for experimenting with, and for having fun just messing around. Android has become way too polished to have fun, and recent changes on the Google side of things actively prevent you from installing arbitrary software. The hardware is similarly too slimmed-down to allow for experimentation.

Looking back, these have been the same stumbling blocks for the last decade. In 2018, I was wondering aloud why we as a community don’t hack on cell phones, and the answer then was the same as it is now – the software is not friendly to our kind. You can write phone apps, and I have tried to do so, but it’s just not fun.

Advertisement

The polar opposites of the smartphone-as-computer are no strangers in our community. I’m thinking of the Linux single-board computers, or even something like a Steam Deck, all of which are significantly less powerful spec-wise than a flagship cell phone, but which are in many ways much more suitable for hacking. Why? Because they make it easy to do the things that we like to do. They’re designed to be fun computers, and so we use them.

So for me, a smartphone isn’t a computer, but oddly enough it’s not because of the hardware. It’s because what I want out of a computer is more than Turing completeness. What I want is the fun and the freedom of computering.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

NYT Connections hints and answers for Sunday, March 15 (game #1008)

Published

on

Looking for a different day?

A new NYT Connections puzzle appears at midnight each day for your time zone – which means that some people are always playing ‘today’s game’ while others are playing ‘yesterday’s’. If you’re looking for Saturday’s puzzle instead then click here: NYT Connections hints and answers for Saturday, March 14 (game #1007).

Good morning! Let’s play Connections, the NYT’s clever word game that challenges you to group answers in various categories. It can be tough, so read on if you need Connections hints.

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Rise of model context protocol in the agentic era

Published

on

We have all heard about model context protocol (MCP) in the context of artificial intelligence. In this article, we will dive into what MCP is and why it is becoming more important by the day. When APIs are already available then why do we need MCP? Although we have seen a large rise in popularity of MCP, is there staying power in this new protocol? In the first section, we will look at the parallels between APIs and MCP and then start to explore what sets it apart.

From APIs to model context protocol

A single isolated computer is limited in the amount of data that it can access and that has a direct impact on its usability. APIs were created to enable data transfer between systems. Just like APIs, Model Context Protocol (MCP) is the protocol for communication between AI agents that are using large language models (LLMs). APIs are primarily written for developers while MCP servers are created for AI agents (Johnson, 2025). 

What is MCP?

MCP was introduced by Anthropic on November 25, 2024 as an open source standard to enable communication between AI assistants and external data sources. AI agents are constrained by the fragmentation of data in isolated systems (Anthropic, 2024). The protocol defines how agents can interact with external systems, elicit user input and enable automated agents.

At its core MCP utilizes the client server model and there are three main features for clients and servers.

Advertisement
  • MCP servers: tools, resources, and prompts
  • MCP clients: elicitation, roots, and sampling

To keep this article concise, focus will be kept on the most important feature of both client and server. For MCP servers, tools are the primary way to perform complex tasks and clients utilize elicitation to enable a two way communication between the agent and the user.

Instead of explicitly calling APIs, agents select and use the appropriate tools (functions) based on the input they receive from the user. If a tool requires certain parameters the agent will use elicitation to get the data from the user. This allows for a more responsive workflow where two way communication between LLM and the user is possible.

Advertisement

Why do we need MCP now?

A very valid question to ask is if APIs are already present then why is there a need for MCP? APIs are designed to connect fragmented data systems and SaaS applications already enable a two way communication with a user. So, why do we need MCP now?

The main need for MCP is that the user of external data has changed from developers to AI agents. A developer will usually program an application using APIs that behaves in a deterministic fashion. Whereas, AI agents will use the user prompt and make autonomous decisions to execute on the user request. By nature, the execution of a workflow by an AI agent is not deterministic.

APIs are a machine-executable contract which acts in a deterministic fashion. APIs work if the users of APIs know what action needs to be taken next (Posta, 2025). AI agents run on top of probabilistic LLMs which do not consistently deliver repeatable results across all tasks (Atil, 2024). Variance in a LLM’s response is expected and this poses a problem for autonomous execution.

MCP to the rescue

MCP solves the problem of variance in agent execution by providing high level abstraction that wraps functionality rather than API endpoints. Tools enable LLM models to perform actions like searching for a flight, booking a calendar and more (Understanding MCP Servers, 2026). 

Advertisement

One common misconception for tools is that they are just an abstraction over existing API calls. Tools are not designed to be an abstraction over API calls but rather abstraction over functionality. If a lot of APIs are just exposed as tools it will increase the cost and context size for the agent which is not ideal (Johnson, 2025).

A tool may include multiple API calls in its implementation to achieve the desired outcome. An agent will review the list of available tools to automatically select the most appropriate tools and determine the appropriate order of execution.

MCP adoption boom

Since its release in 2024 MCP has seen a steady rise in popularity. The following chart from Google Trends showcases the relative interest in MCP since its launch.

A lot of companies have launched their own MCP servers to facilitate building autonomous agents. As of February 2026, the official MCP registry has over 6400 MCP servers already registered. This number of MCP servers is only expected to grow in the near future. The official registry for MCP servers is still in preview and the ecosystem has grown massively in less than a year.

Advertisement

Other major players in the market have adopted MCP and added support to their clients. OpenAI added MCP support to ChatGPT in March and Google added support a few weeks later in April 2025. This showcases the staying power of the protocol and the fast pace of adoption.

What lies ahead?

MCP is still in the early stages of widespread adoption where a lot of applications need to mature and start hitting production. Leonardo Pineryo from Pento AI summarized it the best “MCP’s first year transformed how AI systems connect to the world. Its second year will transform what they can accomplish” (2025). 

Guardrails around tools is an area that will see further development as trust is one of the biggest concerns with AI agents. With better guardrails in the tools, an AI agent can be allowed to perform with more autonomy. Over the next year, MCP is certain to see continued growth, both in the sophistication of its capabilities and the volume of its application.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

NYT Strands hints and answers for Sunday, March 15 (game #742)

Published

on

Looking for a different day?

A new NYT Strands puzzle appears at midnight each day for your time zone – which means that some people are always playing ‘today’s game’ while others are playing ‘yesterday’s’. If you’re looking for Saturday’s puzzle instead then click here: NYT Strands hints and answers for Saturday, March 14 (game #741).

Strands is the NYT’s latest word game after the likes of Wordle, Spelling Bee and Connections – and it’s great fun. It can be difficult, though, so read on for my Strands hints.

Advertisement

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Don’t Get Used To Cheap AI

Published

on

AI services may not stay cheap for long, as companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are currently subsidizing usage to rapidly grow market share. As these companies move toward profitability and potential IPOs, Axios reports that investors will likely push them to increase prices and improve margins. An anonymous reader shares an excerpt from the report: Flashback: Silicon Valley has seen this movie before. The so-called “millennial lifestyle subsidy” meant VC money helped underwrite cheap Uber rides and DoorDash deliveries. Before that, Amazon built its base with low prices, free shipping and, for years, no sales tax in most states. Eventually, all of these companies had to charge enough to cover costs — and make a profit.

Follow the money: The current iteration of AI subsidies won’t last forever. Both OpenAI and Anthropic are widely expected to go public. Public investors will demand earnings growth and expanding margins. Even as chips get more efficient, total spending keeps rising. Labs need more capacity, more upgrades and more supply to meet demand.

The bottom line: The costs of AI will keep going down. But total spend from customers will need to keep going up if AI companies are going to become profitable and investors are ever going to get returns on their massive investments.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

Spotify launches Taste Profile editor

Published

on

The feature, announced at SXSW by co-CEO Gustav Söderström, lets Premium listeners see and shape the data model powering their recommendations, starting with a beta rollout in New Zealand


For a decade, Spotify’s recommendation engine has worked largely in silence. It watched what you played, noted what you skipped, inferred meaning from the time of day and the tempo of your commute, and it never told you what it had concluded. On Friday, at SXSW in Austin, the company decided to change that.

Gustav Söderström, Spotify’s co-CEO, announced Taste Profile: a new feature that surfaces the algorithmic model the platform has been building about each listener, and crucially lets users modify it directly. The beta will begin rolling out to Premium subscribers in New Zealand in the coming weeks.

The premise is straightforward enough. Taste Profile aggregates a listener’s behaviour across music, podcasts, and audiobooks into a single view: the genres explored recently, the artists listened to most, the patterns that define a listening day.

Advertisement

The 💜 of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

Where a user notices the profile is wrong, too heavy on music they played years ago, or missing a phase they have been quietly working through, they can flag it. They can ask for more of a particular vibe, or less. They can describe a current context, training for an event, commuting on weekdays, and the system will factor that in when deciding what to surface on the Spotify homepage.

“This is the next step in our vision to make personalization more transparent, responsive, and truly yours,” Söderström told the SXSW audience.

Advertisement

Spotify cited an internal figure that more than 80% of its listeners name personalisation as what they value most about the service. The claim, which the company has referenced in various forms since at least 2023, positions algorithmic curation not just as a feature but as the primary reason people stay.

The competitive logic behind Taste Profile follows directly from that: if personalisation is the product, giving users more control over it is a way to deepen their investment in it.

The announcement comes roughly two months after Spotify expanded Prompted Playlist, a separate but related feature that lets users generate playlists by describing what they want in natural language, from its initial New Zealand testing to Premium users in the US and Canada in late January 2026, and subsequently to subscribers in Australia, Ireland, Sweden, and the UK in February. The sequencing is deliberate.

Both features push the same underlying argument: that the future of streaming personalisation is collaborative, not passive.

Advertisement

Where Prompted Playlist is generative,  it creates something new from a description, Taste Profile is corrective. It works with the model that already exists, giving users a chance to audit and adjust what years of listening have written about them.

Whether someone has been an accidental customer of the algorithm (playing whatever appeared on the homepage, not particularly caring) or has strong views about the direction their recommendations have taken, the feature is designed to accommodate both. “You can shape your Taste Profile as much as you’d like,” the company said in its announcement, “or leave it and enjoy Spotify as usual.”

The beta will start in New Zealand, a market Spotify has used repeatedly for early-stage testing of AI-adjacent features, including the initial Prompted Playlist launch. No timeline was given for a broader global rollout. Taste Profile will be available to Premium subscribers only; there was no indication of when, or whether, it might reach free-tier accounts.

Spotify is marking 2026 as its 20th anniversary year, and its SXSW presence this week has been calibrated accordingly, concerts, a headline session with Söderström, country artist Lainey Wilson, and podcast host David Friedberg.

Advertisement

The Taste Profile announcement landed on the last day of the company’s main SXSW programming, providing a product note to accompany the celebration.

What the feature represents, beyond its functionality, is a shift in how Spotify frames its relationship with listeners. The algorithm has always existed; the company is now making the case that knowing it is there, and having some say in what it does, is a feature in itself.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tech

U.S. State Bans on Lab-Grown Meats Challenged in Court

Published

on

Last June Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller said in a statement that Texans “have a God-given right to know what’s on their plate, and for millions of Texans, it better come from a pasture, not a lab. It’s plain cowboy logic that we must safeguard our real, authentic meat industry from synthetic alternatives.”

But California company Wildtype sells lab-grown salmon — and is suing Texas over its ban on cell-cultivated meat, the Austin Chronicle reported this week. The company’s founder says lab-grown salmon eliminates the mercury, microplastic, and antibiotic contamination commonly found in seafood. And one chef in Austin, Texas says lab-grown salmon is “awesome” and “something new”– at the only Texas restaurant that was serving it last summer:

Just two months after the salmon hit the menu, Texas banned the sale of cell-cultivated meat…
A lawsuit from Wildtype and one other FDA-approved cultivated meat company [argues] it’s anti-capitalism and unconstitutional… This law “was not enacted to protect the health and safety of Texas consumers — indeed, it allows the continued distribution of cultivated meat to consumers so long as it is not sold. Instead, SB 261 was enacted to stifle the growth of the cultivated meat industry to protect Texas’ conventional agricultural industry from innovative competition that is exclusively based outside of Texas….” [according to the lawsuit]. It was filed in September, immediately after the ban took effect, and cell-cultivated companies are awaiting judgment.

That Texas ban would last two years, notes U.S. News and World Reports, adding that
Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, and Nebraska have also passed bans, some temporary “on the manufacturing, sale or distribution of cell-cultured meat.” Meanwhile, a new five-year moratorium on lab-grown meat was signed this week by the governor of South Dakota “after rejecting a permanent ban last month,” reports South Dakota Searchlight:

The new law bars the sale, manufacture or distribution of “cell-cultured protein” products from July 1 this year through June 30, 2031. Violations are punishable by up to 30 days in jail, a fine of up to $500, or both.
“But supporters of lab-grown meat are not going down without a fight,” adds U.S. News and World Reports, with another lawsuit also filed challenging a ban in Florida:

Advertisement


When Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the ban in Florida, he described it as “fighting back against the global elite’s plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals.” He added that his administration “will save our beef.”

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Amazon's ad-free Prime Video tier gets a new name, and a new price

Published

on

Amazon’s streaming service is getting a significant upgrade as the company transitions its ad-free tier to the new “Prime Video Ultra” branding. And with that branding, comes a price hike.

Prime Video logo with the word prime in blue, video in dark gray, above the signature curved Amazon arrow in blue on a white background
Prime Video Ultra

Launching April 10, the Ultra tier expands existing features, making it ideal for larger households. Beyond removing ads, the updated plan increases the concurrent stream limit to five devices, doubles the offline download capacity to 100 items, and gives users the option to watch in 4K/UHD.
Amazon is also increasing the benefits for those who have the ad-supported video plan that comes gratis with a Prime membership. Those customers will be allowed to watch 4 concurrent streams, up from three, and download 50 items for offline viewing, up from 25.
Continue Reading on AppleInsider | Discuss on our Forums

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Proof over promises: a new doctrine for cybersecurity

Published

on

For years, third-party cybersecurity relationships between vendors and customers have relied on contracts and trust. That model is now showing its age. In the past year alone, 51% of UK organizations have reported a third party-related breach, while vendors have become ideal attack vectors for hostile actors.

Sam Kirkman

Director of EMEA Services at NetSPI.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Peter Gabriel “Taking the Pulse” Blu-ray Review: Symphonic Concert in a Roman Amphitheater with DTS-HD Master Audio

Published

on

I’ll admit that when I first started watching the recently released Blu-ray Disc of Peter Gabriel’s Taking the Pulse, it all felt very familiar. If you saw his orchestral tour around the time of Scratch My Back, or already own New Blood: Live in London on Blu-ray, a sense of déjà vu might set in. Look a little closer, however, and the differences start to emerge. What initially feels like a continuation of the same orchestral concept reveals a number of subtle but meaningful changes that aren’t immediately obvious.

In fact, the Blu-ray Disc packaging and frankly most of the press materials I had read, don’t offer much reason why fans should rush to add this show to their Peter Gabriel collection. Fortunately, I found more clues on Mr. Gabriel’s website, where his daughter Anna, who directed the film, offers some insight into her approach:

eter Gabriel's Taking The Pulse concert video on Blu-ray Disc

“When I spoke to my dad about shooting one of his shows I jumped at the chance of shooting at the Roman amphitheatre in Verona, Italy. Italians have always been very enthusiastic audience and give a lot back to the performer and to the camera. I made this film with my friend Andrew Gaston who was truly my collaborator throughout the process. It is always fun for me to shoot my father as I know the material and his performances so well I feel that I can capture a side to him that feels more personal. I also wanted to shoot the orchestra in an exciting way and along with Andrew’s editing I think we really captured the energy of the entire performance. I look forward to sharing this film.”

Indeed, Taking the Pulse offers a fresh visual perspective on this remarkable music when compared to New Blood: Live in London. Happily, it also delivers a different sonic experience, with a more immersive 5.1 surround sound presentation that better envelops the listener.

Advertisement

Presented in 24-bit/48 kHz resolution, the DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack is generally quite rich. But my appreciation grew once I realized that the surround channels were being used for more than just crowd noise and venue ambience. One of my recurring complaints about many concert videos is that the surround mixes often feel lazy, failing to take full advantage of what the technology can actually deliver.

peter-gabriel-taking-pulse-blu-ray-screenshot

While most of the action resides in the front channels, the audio for Taking The Pulse nearly wraps around the listener.  I imagine this perspective is bit more like what I’d like to think the orchestra conductor was hearing on stage or — perhaps better still — Peter Gabriel himself!

The sometimes dark, moody lighting looks great (expect lots of blues and reds as well as bursts of light and sparkle). In general, I think I preferred the intercuts and perspective offered in Taking The Pulse over New Blood Live In London (which, mind you, I’ve long enjoyed!). 

All in all, Taking The Pulse is a winner Blu-ray video and for $18.29 on Amazon it seems to be an easy decision to pick this up if you are a fan.


Mark Smotroff is a deep music enthusiast / collector who has also worked in entertainment oriented marketing communications for decades supporting the likes of DTS, Sega and many others. He reviews vinyl for Analog Planet and has written for Audiophile Review, Sound+Vision, Mix, EQ, etc.  You can learn more about him at LinkedIn.

Advertisement
Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025