Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 538 posts

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#101

Post by moate »

DDebbieDDowner wrote: post #79
sithadmin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per the article: >It has as much bioavailable iron and protein as the same size serving of ground beef, with 14 grams of fat and 240 calories per quarter-pound patty. Also, per Impossible's site, changes to nutrition for the new recipe are: >The new Impossible Burger features 30% less sodium and 40% less saturated fat than the current recipe and just as much protein as 80/20 ground beef from cows The original recipe…

>It has as much bioavailable iron and protein as the same size serving of ground beef Which ofc it's nothing but marketing nonsense considering that the most bioavailable form of iron Heme-iron is found only in meats.

"Most" doesn't mean "only". Non-heme iron is real, I promise.

Hell they could really cheat and just throw ferrous sulfate directly in the mix rather than using naturally occurring iron in the veggies.

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#102

Post by paulcole »

danharaj wrote: post #6

That's really cool. Although I wish there were more vegan food that didn't try to replicate non-vegan textures and flavors. Imitation can only be playing catch-up. The best vegan and vegetarian food does its own thing.

> Although I wish there were more vegan food that didn't try to replicate non-vegan textures and flavors

There are. They're called vegetables, fruits, nuts, beans, and grains.

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#103

Post by nate_meurer »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #47
cerebellum42 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crops are also not perfectly efficient, but it's simply replacing two chained instances of inefficiencies with one. Instead of Crops -> Animal feed -> Cattle -> Meat -> Eat you have Crops -> some processing -> Eat

Then there's the 92% of grazing land that doesn't grow crops. That's a clear win for cattle.

No it's not. Only a tiny fraction of cattle are solely pastured. Each beef cow, even if pastured for the first year (which is typical) requires literally tons of high-calorie corn and or soy feed to bring it up to slaughter weight. Guess where that feed is grown.

Besides, the range land you're talking about isn't needed for crops anyway. We have more than enough arable land to grow crops for direct human consumption.

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#104

Post by orthecreedence »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #47
cerebellum42 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crops are also not perfectly efficient, but it's simply replacing two chained instances of inefficiencies with one. Instead of Crops -> Animal feed -> Cattle -> Meat -> Eat you have Crops -> some processing -> Eat

Then there's the 92% of grazing land that doesn't grow crops. That's a clear win for cattle.

Are you talking about all the land that used to be rainforest?

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#105

Post by stochastic_monk »

nate_meurer wrote: post #93
stochastic_monk wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suggest other plant protein sources, like soy or pea. Wheat, in particular, has a terrible amino acid profile for humans [0]. Aside from making it so that anyone with coeliac can't consume their burgers, it's just not as effective for humans as animal protein. Pea and soy, however, are nearly as effective and much better for the earth/environment. [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3887888

The incomplete protein thing is a myth [1]. The amino acid profile of single ingredients is almost never a concern in practice, because meals nearly always contain complimentary proteins. It's actually really difficult to avoid complimentary proteins if you have anything like normal dietary habits. Furthermore, it's not even necessary for every meal to provide all essential amino acids, as long as your diet isn't chr…

It depends on your protein needs and goals. Survival is different from optimal performance.

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#106

Post by wvlia5- »

logfromblammo wrote: post #50
nindalf wrote: post #3

Congrats to that team for building a great product. I hope they see a lot of success. Long term, I hope plant based meat alternatives become commoditized. If there are a bunch of alternatives that taste just as good and importantly are cheaper than meat , most people will switch. That's a huge win for the environment (and also animal rights), and I can't wait to see it happen.

This is about the only kind of vegan proselytizing that I can stomach. If you can make food that tastes as good as meat, with nutrition similar to meat, and sell it at a lower price than meat, I will switch overnight, and never look back. And it would be nice if it came in bulk forms, rather than just as pre-formed patties. I eat ground beef a lot more often than I eat burgers. Until then, good luck with the test kit…

So you are basically saying "if I had to make no effort at all and I could also save some money, I would switch". Yes, that's obvious, everyone would, it's redundant to state it.

But what those 'vegan proselytizers' are asking you for, is to not be so selfish and make a bit of a sacrifice to spare the lives of others. But of course, you 'can't stomach' to be asked to not be selfish, and they are the ones to blame.

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#107

Post by nate_meurer »

atonse wrote: post #94
screye wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being born in India, I've had the privilege to eat vegetarian meals that can rival even the best meat based meal. While I welcome 'impossible' meat replacements, it is funny that the meat reduction movement is looking at such impractical and immature products instead of simpler solutions such as bringing veg friendly cuisines to the fore. I am opposed to advocating for cold-turkey veganism though. Milk products and e…

Being of Indian descent, I might be biased. But Indian cuisine is the only cuisine I'm aware of where being vegetarian isn't a compromise in the creativity, quality, and sheer flavors available to you. For other cuisines, where centuries of culinary creativity mostly went towards making meat, this is the only viable approach to weaning us off growing animals for meaty foods.

This white guy agrees :)

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#108

Post by agentdrtran »

SupaFlyak wrote: post #12

Do vegan/vegetarians really want something that reminds them of meat products? Why not just make a good meat-free sandwich that doesn't imitate another product?

I'm not vegetarian and love these types of products.

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#109

Post by ebetica0 »

One of the smaller Asian grocers in New York City has made the best fake meat I've had by far, and I wouldn't be surprised if it sources for many of the vegetarian Asian restaurants in the city. http://www.maywahnyc.com/ I wonder how many other places exist in the world like it, and how much a little bit of marketing would do for them.

Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal

#110

Post by callumprentice »

In the early 70s, my dad worked at a place that (as a side business I think) made a meat substitute called KESP. He used to bring samples home and mum would make pies from it. Tasted awful if I remember correctly but I'm surprised it's taken this long to get to a viable meat alternative.
Post reply on HN