Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal • Hacker News Board

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

#291

Post by norswap » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:08 PM UTC

skybrian wrote: post #251

be-ez wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you didn't read the report or check the references on page 26. I recommend reading this paper and coming to your own conclusion about "almost no doubt". Within sustainability science, there is little debate about the lack of efficiency to produce protein via cows. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...

That's more impressive, and yet, as a non-expert, I still don't know how to evaluate whether the calculation is bug-free. Do you? I guess I'd have to track down all the references and build my own spreadsheet? There are some spreadsheets listed in the references, but it seems like a complicated task. Just to nit-pick one little detail, it seems to treat all land the same: "Significant decreases in land occupation als…

Juse because "we can't be absolutely sure" doesn't mean the evidence doesn't point in a direction.

There doesn't seem to be ground to overwhelmingly doubt to evidence to the point where the conclusions are radically reversed.

It's a known cognitive bias (assuming you don't know what you're doing) or sophism (if you do).

See: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/GrDqnMjhqoxiqpQPw/the-proper...

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

#292

Post by soperj » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:08 PM UTC

be-ez wrote: post #48

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.

When compared to meat there is almost no doubt that Impossible is better for the environment. Impossible has an environmental mission first. Checkout the sustainability report from 2017 http://www.ift.org/~/media/Food%20Technology/Weekly/IF_Susta... Or the update from 2018 https://impossiblefoods.com/if-pr/2018-Impact-Update/

At least mention that you work for the company.

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

#293

Post by jtuente » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:11 PM UTC

danso wrote: post #284

jtuente wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cold-turkey is an idiom meaning to immediately change without a transition. It's often used as "quitting smoking cold-turkey".

Yes, I'm aware of that. But this is the full context of the comment: > I am opposed to advocating for cold-turkey veganism though. Milk products and eggs are great meat substitutes, and the lack of both makes entire cuisines inaccessible. The "immediately change" connotation of "cold-turkey" doesn't make much sense here. The commenter seems to imply that eliminating entire cuisines -- i.e. having "entire cuisines ina…

> Which is why I find it weird that he thinks it's weird why people who weren't born on vegetarian cuisines can't just switch to them, when introduced.

I didn't read it like this at all. He's arguing to bring more vegetarian cuisines to the forefront to raise awareness of the possibilities that exist. His critique was against lauding the "impossible" as the solution to getting everyone on veganism immediately.

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

#294

Post by ousta » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:13 PM UTC

I tried 1.0 it was horrible. even a macdonald hamburger was more edible. I doubt that heavily process soybeans (known for developing breast in men) are the way to go. but who knows im not a marketing manager.

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

#295

Post by sf_rob » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:14 PM UTC

ArthurBrussee wrote: post #197

I unironically can't wait to read release notes about newer versions of my food

Soylent has proper release notes: https://soylent.com/pages/release-notes

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

#296

Post by odyssey7 » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:14 PM UTC

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…

For me as a vegetarian, getting into Indian food was a dietary breakthrough. Vegetarian Indian food has already been developed for thousands of years to be tasty and meet dietary requirements.

I grew up on typical American cuisine and then became vegetarian, and I was disappointed by a lot of vegetarian recipes that were designed to make sense to people with my culinary background. However, I recognize that switching someone's cuisine is a big thing to ask for; reducing meat consumption will go a lot smoother if it doesn't mean switching to a new culinary tradition - which is why cookbooks featuring those recipes that I didn't like are so popular.

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

#297

Post by newnewpdro » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:16 PM UTC

mey wrote: post #181

zornado wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not getting this. Highly processed foods are the source of all problems and people cheer up for synthetic food!

This sounds like clean food concepts. There isn't science behind clean/unclean. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthorexia_nervosa https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/11/why-we-...

The more processing a food stuff undergoes the more opportunity there is for it to be adulterated and/or contaminated.

Oftentimes it's not even intentional. e.g. An ingredient supplier from China delivers whey tainted with Cadmium, this gets mixed into a protein shake powder. Nowhere on the ingredients is Cadmium and the company producing protein shake powder had no intention whatever of producing Cadmium-laced shakes.

This type of thing has occurred multiple times quite publicly in pet foods. Contaminated cat food made from contaminated Chinese ingredients killed an ex coworker's cats years ago, if memory serves the contaminant was Melamine.

An effective means of protecting ourselves from these industrial errors is to avoid eating industrially manufactured foods altogether.

There was a case back in I believe it was the 80s where a red food dye was being derived from Coal tar. When the process worked flawlessly, there was no problem. But the dye was found to be carcinogenic, because the process, as one would expect, had a non-zero error rate. The public reaction to this news is what led to red M&Ms being deprecated for years, even though they supposedly didn't use the red dye in question. Which is the only reason I even know the story. I presume there are many instances of this kind of thing occurring that manage to fly under the radar.

Soylent was in the news fairly early on with contaminated China-sourced ingredients as well.

An even more recent incident has been chopped romaine lettuce as supplied to fast-food chains like Chipotle. Some supplier had contaminated heads with e.coli, the processor then spread the contamination to a much larger scale as they consolidated supplies from multiple farms, chopped it all up, then shipped it out.

By simply avoiding consumption of chopped lettuce, a minimal amount of processing, one significantly reduced the probability they would be exposed to the e.coli.

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

#298

Post by wil421 » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:18 PM UTC

chefgoldbluum wrote: post #256

skybrian wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why "no doubt"? What's your basis for that? I'm no expert, but I expect land is different in different places. There are different sources of feed. Someone changes a supplier or a farming practice, and it changes a number in a spreadsheet, and you'll get a different answer. Accounting gets complicated enough with money. When you're doing science it's much more difficult. This sounds like the sort of thing that scient…

The burger is made primarily from Soy. Soy accounts for 2/3 of global protein feed. Humans eating directly from livestock's primary food source is likely to be much more efficient at a global scale.

Where did you get soy is the primary food source for cattle?

This article recommends no more than 20% soy in cattle’s diet. The article is from last year. [1]

>Researchers have found that when the oil content of the ration exceeds 7 percent, it can be toxic to the microbes in the cattle’s rumen and decrease digestibility. Too much oil in cattle rations will lead to scours (diarrhea), cessation of rumen fermentation and, eventually, death.

“Because of these limitations, the recommended upper limit of feeding would be about 20 percent of the ration,” Hoppe says. “Practical feeding levels are probably more like 2 to 3 pounds per head per day. At this low rate of supplementation, soybeans provide an excellent source of protein and energy.”

[1]https://www.drovers.com/article/soybeans-may-be-viable-cattl...

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

#299

Post by kevinslashslash » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

phkahler wrote: post #132

Why do some vegans and vegetarians want to eat something that looks like meat? This is not to say vegans and vegetarians are the only market for plant-based "meat" or "burgers".

Why don't animal eaters want to eat something that looks like an animal? Meat does not get a monopoly on being a blob of brown stuff

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

#300

Post by WorldMaker » Tue, Jan 08, 2019, 9:22 PM UTC

Eric_WVGG wrote: post #137

maxxxxx wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

My experience is that Impossible is better "medium rare" than most of the other ways of cooking it. A place near me serves it by default as a "steak burger", medium rare with fried onions and A1, and that does seem to play well to the strengths of the Impossible.

(On the flipside it does feel like the Beyond Burger is best a greasy "medium" or "medium well". The best I've had that served is in a vegan variation of a Big Mac. It's easy to get Impossible and Beyond confused, so maybe that's what you experienced?)