But it's imitation meat. Why not call it meat. Are hotdogs deceptive advertising now too as they probably don't contain any dog meat?
[1] https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/59e9d405-24bb-431a-b98b-98d...
[2] https://images.wsj.net/im-13668?width=1260&aspect_ratio=1.5
Ahh so this will clear up the contents of what is in hotdog(and other processed meats) and allow me to not be bamboozled into eating fake meat.
This is a non problem being trumped up by an industry that wants to use regulatory capture to make its competitors products less attractive and visible.
Where do you draw the line for what deceptive labeling is allowed and what isn't? How many of the other existing food labeling regulations should we throw out?
What if I label my package to look _very_ similar to a meat product, but put the words "not real meat" in size 8 font on the bottom of the package, is that acceptable?
Then I think you'd have a complaint under existing laws, rather than trying to make a mountain out of a mole-hill. The same would be true in reverse, if a product claimed prominently to be tofu based but contained meat.
I think it's very, very telling that part of the desired result for the meat industry is to prevent these products from sharing shelf space.
I think that's fair. We already have a healthy set of regulatory requirements around product labeling, and I'm not really opposed to tweaking the labeling requirements around meat vs non-meat products. Regulating shelf-space does seem to be crossing an unnecessary line.