I think the term 'meat' is very broad. Taste-wise there will (and maybe already are) meat-substitutes that are comparable to animal-meat. But these are very artificial products and healthwise maybe not a good choice.

Animal meat itself varies in it's nutritional properties, depending on how the livestock is treated. Grass-fed, free range beef is not the same as grain fed, factory raised.

I'm not sure about in-vitro meat, but I doubt it is from a nutrition standpoint even comparable to, for example, high quality beef.

My point is, meat != meat and often I read only about mimicking taste and texture. For me the nutritional profile is more important (also ethics, but this normally goes hand in hand with meat-quality).