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

131–140 of 538 posts

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

#131

Post by CompelTechnic »

bluGill wrote: post #117
wvlia5- wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

My values are not yours. I do not consider animal lives worth valuing or deserving of rights. This is a fundamental disagreement, the only possible peaceful solution is agree to disagree (I hope we don't come down to the non-peaceful ones)

Interesting, judging by the other replies, that the opponents in your debate have not agreed to disagree, despite the fact that the underlying differences are deep-rooted enough that any action on their part, especially on an internet forum, is unlikely to make a change.

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

#133

Post by hundt »

tptacek wrote: post #40
alangpierce wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plant-based foods are almost always significantly more efficient to produce than meat since you no longer need to grow all of the food to feed an animal for its entire life. From another article ( https://www.cnet.com/news/impossible-burger-2-0-tastes-like-... ): > But Impossible Foods can produce a burger using a fourth of the water and less than 4 percent of the land -- and emit one-tenth of the greenhouse gases --…

It's easy to win the argument that plant-based foods are more efficient to mass-produce than CAFO meat, but you might need to be careful generalizing; pigs and chickens fed forage and scrap are supposedly pretty efficient as well. (I have no idea if there's an efficient way to scale beef).

> I have no idea if there's an efficient way to scale beef

If you're interested, https://twitter.com/drsplace is a good follow. She writes and cites a lot on this topic (because she is employed by the beef industry).

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

#134

Post by PhasmaFelis »

toyg wrote: post #9
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.

Until the people currently destroying forests to grow cattle, start destroying forests to grow ingredients for these burgers. Soil depletion is also a thing. I still remember the argument for biofuel and where it ended up. More options in the mix is always good, but trying to replace everything with vegetable stuff is not going to work in the long run.

> trying to replace everything with vegetable stuff is not going to work in the long run.

I'm not sure what you think the alternative is. People need to eat.

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

#135

Post by cpeterso »

stochastic_monk wrote: post #87
nickik wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Impossible Burger is designed to use environmentally friendly ingredients that can scale. I don't understand what your issue is.

I’m suggesting they simply use different plant protein to do so. Would you consider wheat protein to be the only kind that can scale? If so, why?

Beyond Meat, another meat-substitute company, uses soy and pea protein:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond_Meat

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

#136

Post by pstuart »

CompelTechnic wrote: post #131
bluGill wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My values are not yours. I do not consider animal lives worth valuing or deserving of rights. This is a fundamental disagreement, the only possible peaceful solution is agree to disagree (I hope we don't come down to the non-peaceful ones)

Interesting, judging by the other replies, that the opponents in your debate have not agreed to disagree, despite the fact that the underlying differences are deep-rooted enough that any action on their part, especially on an internet forum, is unlikely to make a change.

I didn't technically disagree, I merely asked for clarification of a statement. The only answer was a downvote.

Edit: I'm not vegan because I'm lazy and love bacon cheeseburgers, etc. Beyond Meat and their ilk are helping to address the last part and I'm excited for it.

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

#137

Post by Eric_WVGG »

maxxxxx wrote: post #67
novia wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to feel this way until I tried an impossible burger (1.0, I presume). I thought the only way to allow the more carnivorous of us to have a satisfying meal while eliminating animal suffering was to grow petri dish meat. Impossible burgers seriously nail the taste and texture and nutritional proportions. It also seems like it will be much more cost effective to create them than the aforementioned petri dish burg…

I find this interesting. I tried an Impossible Burger a while ago and I didn't find it to taste like meat at all.

If you were like me, you probably asked for it “medium rare”. That doesn’t really work with Impossibles, they need to be cooked “well done” to get that crust and avoid being mushy.

[edit] lol... okay next post contradicts my report... well anyway don’t expect the temps and results to exactly map would be my takeaway

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

#138

Post by mrguyorama »

screye wrote: post #46
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.

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…

The one big problem for me is that nearly every "veggie" dish I've ever known would be IMPROVED with meat in my very personal opinion. Is there any meal/food that tastes worse with a dead animal added?

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

#139

Post by rebuilder »

stochastic_monk wrote: post #18
giarc wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"but trying to replace everything with vegetable stuff is not going to work in the long run." But we have to eat... what do you recommend we replace our protein intake with?

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 question you're replying to isn't the one being asked. Also, per the article, the current iteration of the Impossible Burger is no longer wheat-based.

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

#140

Post by PhasmaFelis »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #20
cerebellum42 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cattle need to be fed too, and they don't turn their food into meat very efficiently. That's why replacing meat with plant based alternatives is (almost) always a huge gain in efficiency, in terms of resource use.

I believe this is an urban legend? Anyway, most crops don't convert to protein any better than cattle.

I don't know where you're getting your information, but it's not correct.
Post reply on HN