Background: The concept of a clean label is difficult to define, even in common language, as the interpretation of what a “clean” food is differs from one person to another and from one organisation to another. The lack of a unique definition and regulations of what the term “clean” means, along with the growing consumer demand for more “natural” and healthier foods, is posing new challenges for manufacturers and ingredient producers. The meat industry, in particular, has been affected by this new movement owing to negative attitudes and feelings consumers associate with consuming processed meat products. Scope and approach: The review scope is to describe attributes and associations around the “clean” label term by analysing the most recent ingredients, additives and processing methods currently available for meat manufacturers. Their application in meat, plant-based alternatives and hybrid meat/plant products, current limitations and challenges presented in consumer perception, safety and potential impacts on product quality are also presented. Key findings and conclusions: The availability of a growing number of “clean” label ingredients provides a new suite of approaches that are available for application by meat processors to help overcome some of the negative connotations associated with processed meat products and also support plant-based meat alternatives and hybrids.

Despite increasingly detailed knowledge of the biochemical processes involved in the determination of meat quality traits, robust models, using biochemical characteristics of the muscle to predict future meat quality, lack. The neglecting of various aspects of the model paradigm may explain this. First, preslaughter stress has a major impact on meat quality and varies according to slaughter context and individuals. Yet, it is rarely taken into account in meat quality models. Second, phenotypic similarity does not imply similarity in the underlying biological causes, and several models may be needed to explain a given phenotype. Finally, the implications of the complexity of biological systems are discussed: a homeostatic equilibrium can be reached in countless ways, involving thousands of interacting processes and molecules at different levels of the organism, changing over time and differing between animals. Consequently, even a robust model may explain a significant part, but not all of the variability between individuals.