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

321–330 of 538 posts

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

#321

Post by RobotCaleb »

zapzupnz wrote: post #302
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.

I agree that the best vegan and vegetarian food does its own thing, but for me, a pescatarian, the idea of not having the delicious taste and texture of salmon slowly baked in a cast iron pan for four hours whilst being basted with oil every half an hour … my tongue just disallows it. It's not yet a sacrifice I'm willing to make until I encounter a viable alternative, and so efforts like these are a step further not…

Tell me more about this delicious salmon you cook.

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

#322

Post by colechristensen »

puranjay wrote: post #146
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.

I love meat but I've always struggled to reconcile my love of eating it with my love of animals. I would be happy to pay a premium if it meant I could get meat-like taste without the guilt

You don't have to feel guilty. It is the disconnection between humans and animals that causes many of those feelings and if you shift your thinking, you can have a much better experience. When you participate in the process of raising, killing, butchering, and eating the animals which are your food you will appreciate them – love them – and the life they had and gave for you to live. Food encased in plastic from a grocery store really prevents this connection.

Life both begins and ands and you don't have to run away from the end of things or think that making life as long as possible is necessarily better.

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

#324

Post by vel0city »

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…

IRT meat substitutes coming in bulk forms as opposed to pre-formed patties, I've had "Beyond Meat" before which comes as a ground beef substitute as well as patties. The prices for Beyond Meat weren't much higher than the leanest ground beef at the grocery store.

https://www.beyondmeat.com/

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

#325

Post by z_ »

wil421 wrote: post #318
unclewaltr wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, this might be why soy is pressed for its oil before being used as cattle feed. The resulting patties are used as feed and the oil byproduct is sold.

I don’t think that’s the case. It is not feasible for a farmer to buy feed during the lifetime of the animal. It’s the reason they have huge pastures for grazing during warm months. During winter they are usually fed hay. All beef is grass fed period. Some are finished at the end with corn or other dense grains (your soy patties). Here’s an article from a Meat Scientist. https://meatscience.org/TheMeatWeEat/topics/ra…

Except when the feed is actually sheep.

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

#326

Post by ruffrey »

wavegeek wrote: post #323

Would it kill them to provide some decent nutritional information? Like how much salt is in the product? I found in the past that all the palatable meat substitutes were loaded with salt.

From their FAQ: 430 mg sodium in 3 oz

https://images.ctfassets.net/hhv516v5f7sj/5p1YQzJxduEoC2gIWa...

https://impossiblefoods.com/faq/

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

#327

Post by charlesju »

wavegeek wrote: post #323

Would it kill them to provide some decent nutritional information? Like how much salt is in the product? I found in the past that all the palatable meat substitutes were loaded with salt.

Isn't it just this? https://impossiblefoods.com/faq/

430mg per patty which is about the same sodium as like canned tuna

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

#328

Post by wavegeek »

firethief wrote: post #219
goda90 wrote: post #82

Whether accurate or not, lots of opinion swirls around the effects that eating soy has on testosterone levels in men. Even if these plant based "meats" are indistinguishable in flavor and texture, they might end up losing to lab grown meat in the long run because of concerns like that.

That sounds like concern trolling, but I'll bite: a meta analysis of controlled trials is unequivocal https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19524224

Having looked at a few of these studies I found the following problems

1. Industry sponsorship. Which has been shown to produce wildly biased results.

2. Small, short term studies which can only find a "significant" (i.e. statistically significant) effect if the effect is large and immediate.

In some of the studies an effect showed up close to statistical significance but the headline was "no effect found"

3. I don't know about this one, but some analyses have found that a majority of review papers were ghost written by industry PR hacks who them paid professors to put their names on them.

I suggest read the papers closely and looking hard at sponsorship issues before believing them.

Also note that these studies were on adult men. There is every reason to suspect that the developing male fetus is orders of magnitude more vulnerable to environmental hormone disruptors of all kinds.

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

#329

Post by groestl »

ibejoeb wrote: post #248
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…

Out of curiosity, what eats more animals, humans or the rest of the animal kingdom?

Spiders consume twice the biomass of all adults on earth every year, so I think it's safe to say: Animals. Both in number as well as in weight, even if all humans adopted the US lifestyle (120kg meat/year).

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

#330

Post by kkhire »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #310
gadders wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if I'd eat this burger, but if lab-grown meat was available and as good as the natural alternative, I think I would definitely switch. Sadly if everyone did this it would probably mean we would only see cows, sheep etc in zoos, rather than grazing in fields.

"Sadly if everyone did this it would probably mean we would only see cows, sheep etc in zoos, rather than grazing in fields." Eh, not really, as cows and sheep and goats still provide valuable resources. Milk and wools, for example. I'm guessing lots of other things can be taken as they die naturally - leathers and stuff from bones and pet foods and whatnot. Sure, we could eventually engineer ourselves out of needing…

there's nut milks and faux leather. nearly everything has a plant-based alternative and if something doesn't, it will have one soon.
Post reply on HN