The National Football League (NFL) has said it is not allowed to recommend a particular type of meat.

In a statement released Monday, the NFL’s head of communications said the league “is not currently looking for any specific ingredient” for its meat products.

However, the statement added that the league is “aware of the growing interest in meat-free options” and is “continuing to support the development of those options.”

“While we do not recommend any specific food for any of our products, we have been encouraging manufacturers and retailers to explore the use of alternative products that meet our guidelines,” the statement said.

“In general, we encourage the use and experimentation of alternatives to animal products, including, but not limited to, animal products derived from plants, grains, nuts, seeds, and other plant-based sources.”

The NFL did not specify what type of alternative meat is used in its products, but the statement did note that the NFL is “committed to the use, sustainability, and quality of our animal-based products.”

“This is one of the key reasons we support the adoption of alternative meats,” the NFL statement continued.

“These include, but are not limited in our support of a diverse range of meats and products, such as: whole-animal, plant-protein, grass-fed, non-GMO, organic, or grass-finished.”

The statement also noted that the AFL “has not yet taken action on this specific issue, but will soon.”

The Australian Meat Institute, which has been lobbying the NFL to support plant-food alternatives, said the new statement shows the NFL does not “see any value in providing a clear guidance for the meat industry.”

“We’re encouraged that the game is taking action to support alternative animal-food products,” the AMA’s executive director of science and innovation, Mark Sargent, told the ABC.

“The NFL needs to take the lead in addressing the issue and making this an industry-wide issue.

It’s very disappointing that they’re going backwards, they’re not taking the lead and they’re being very opaque.”

In 2015, the AFL also said it was not allowed “to recommend a specific food or ingredient for its products,” although it acknowledged that its products are made with “a wide range of different animal-source products.”

However, a spokesperson for the NFL said it would be “inappropriate” for the league to make a decision on any specific product before it has been tested and approved by its scientific advisory committee.

“We don’t comment on individual product testing,” the spokesperson told the AP.

“However, in a bid to be transparent, we would like to state that all of our meat products are tested on a regular basis and are reviewed by our scientific advisory group before we are released to the market.”

“The process of reviewing and approving all our products is an ongoing process and we do so every time we introduce a new product.”‘

Not necessarily a new concept’The AFL said it did not consider the use or experimentation of “dark meat” a new or novel idea, but that it was concerned about the “general public’s perception of meat-based meat.”

“Some may be concerned that it may be perceived as a new, unusual or unfamiliar product,” the AFL spokesperson said.

The Australian Greens, however, said there was “not necessarily a whole new concept of ‘dark meats,'” noting that the country’s meat industry has been using animal products for decades.

“There’s been a lot of concern about animal products in the past, especially from the meat-eating public,” Greens spokesperson Richard Di Natale said.

“What we’re seeing in Australia, for example, is a major meat-eater’s breakfast.

But if we’re going to have a breakfast, then why not have a bacon and eggs, which is a breakfast?”

Topics:animal-welfare,community-and-society,animal-education,health,science-and–technology,science,diseases-and/or-disorders,nutrition,veterinary-medicine,vets,health-policy,australia,canberra-2600,actFirst posted May 18, 2021 13:23:57Contact Andrew Lough at [email protected]