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

Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 443 posts

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#11

Post by subpixel »

notus wrote: post #7
subpixel wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think where seitan excels is where the meat it is substituting is heavily seasoned and in smaller pieces. I’d never eat a seitan log as a Thanksgiving turkey substitute, but ironically one of the things you discover when you begin to substitute meat is that a lot of “classics” are flavorless. Chicken, turkey and most fish flesh can be bland and rubbery, which is why they are fried or smothered in sauces as a rule.…

They are only rubbery if you overcook them.

Yes preparation matters and I’m not trying to say all meat is disgusting. Just relating the experience of discovering, upon regularly substituting meat in dishes, that there is nothing inherent to chicken turkey etc that makes it a preferred protein. Meat substitutes can be rubbery too.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#12

Post by mantenpanther »

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).

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#13

Post by hprotagonist »

subpixel wrote: post #6
hprotagonist wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seitan is nice! A lot of americans who are in the demographic to be into substitute meat won't touch it because it is literally a blob of gluten with sauce.

I think where seitan excels is where the meat it is substituting is heavily seasoned and in smaller pieces. I’d never eat a seitan log as a Thanksgiving turkey substitute, but ironically one of the things you discover when you begin to substitute meat is that a lot of “classics” are flavorless. Chicken, turkey and most fish flesh can be bland and rubbery, which is why they are fried or smothered in sauces as a rule.…

>Chicken, turkey and most fish flesh are bland and rubbery, which is why they are fried or smothered in sauces as a rule.

Come visit. I'll bake you a chicken, and i only need about 6 ingredients to change your mind. (salt, pepper, chicken, butter, thyme, dijon mustard optional).

Turkey has never been a favorite of mine, but I had an exceptionally good one that was salted and peppered and then cooked in a big green egg.

Fish has a wide range of flavors, and you clobber them by overwhelming the dish with sauce. I prefer smoked (mmm, kippers. mmm, salmon) or raw (mmm, tuna) over cooked, for sure.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#14

Post by Jare »

subpixel wrote: post #6
hprotagonist wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seitan is nice! A lot of americans who are in the demographic to be into substitute meat won't touch it because it is literally a blob of gluten with sauce.

I think where seitan excels is where the meat it is substituting is heavily seasoned and in smaller pieces. I’d never eat a seitan log as a Thanksgiving turkey substitute, but ironically one of the things you discover when you begin to substitute meat is that a lot of “classics” are flavorless. Chicken, turkey and most fish flesh can be bland and rubbery, which is why they are fried or smothered in sauces as a rule.…

> a lot of “classics” are flavorless. Chicken, turkey and most fish flesh are bland and rubbery

That's because most people enjoy tastes that are loud rather than subtle. It's a bit about educating your palate, but also about sitting down to enjoy the food itself rather than the food being an accessory to some other activity.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#15

Post by krull10 »

jvagner wrote: post #9

As a recent vegetarian, I’m over the meat substitutes. There are only two products I’ve liked, otherwise... the non meat substitutes are way tastier. A good veggie burger patty beats the Impossible burger, in my book.

Agreed, no meat substitute I've had tastes the same or even good, including Beyond Burgers and such. A good veggie burger, that is not trying to be faux meat, but instead is highlighting the veggies, can be great. And unlike every faux-meat substitute it has the added benefit of not making me sick to my stomach...

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#16

Post by thaumaturgy »

FWIW I think he's predicting something which is already beginning to happen. Carl's Jr. (Hardees to you midwestern/east coast folks) recently added Beyond Meat patties to their menu (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-beyond-meat-carl-s-jr-idU...). For a small price extra, you can get a not-farmed-meat burger and they're promoting it pretty heavily.

I dropped in a while back, was surprised to see it on the menu, thought "eh, what the hell", and it was pretty good. I have the kind of palate that would make Gordon Ramsay cry himself to sleep, so I wasn't able to tell the difference between one of their Beyond burgers and one of their regular burgers. Probably helps that their items are a mess of sauces and nonsense too.

Anyway, now when I go back in, I find that I'm having to justify to myself getting a farmed meat burger vs. a Beyond burger, and ... there's not really any justification for it.

I doubt most of Carl's customer base debate personal ethics while staring at the menu, but still, there's no way I'm the only one.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#17

Post by Majromax »

hprotagonist wrote: post #2

One thing i’d genuinely like to see more of in the US is easy and sanely priced access to wild game. Deer populations being what they are, and populations of environmentally troublesome species such as feral boars being what they are, it seems like a net win. i would love to be able to get my hands on venison or boar that’s been processed in a USDA-approved way, because the meat’s high quality, the animals had lives…

> One thing i’d genuinely like to see more of in the US is easy and sanely priced access to wild game.

That could pose a problem with Chronic Wasting Disease (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_wasting_disease). Prion illnesses are no joke, so widespread consumption of wild game in North America presents a small but concerning risk of spreading the disease to humans.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#18

Post by dagw »

mantenpanther wrote: post #12

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 m…

But these are very artificial products and healthwise maybe not a good choice.

Even if they actually are fine heathwise, it might be hard convincing people of that fact. My wife for example refuses to buy frozen ready made veggieburger patties and insists on making them from scratch because she wants to know what she's eating. There is no way you could convince here to buy these artificial meat substitutes over ground beef no matter what they taste like or what health arguments you make.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#19

Post by mattmanser »

tgb wrote: post #8

I think he's wrong about people not having loyalty to meat. There is a ton of literal hatred for veganism and vegetarians in this world. Think of the practically cult-like following bacon has. I recall a thread some years ago on Reddit's r/fitness with someone asking for vegan protein sources due to certain allergies or other health restrictions and it was spammed with dozens of comments along the lines of "bacon" an…

I think you're very wrong and pg is spot on.

I remember when Vegan/Vegetarians were sneered at in the UK 25 years ago, but they aren't now.

In the space of 25 years it's gone from being rare to see veggie options, to it being the norm to have at least 25% non-meat options on the menu. Attitudes change, and once it's gone, most people will eventually find the idea of rearing animals to kill repellant.

If you can deliver me meat taste and texture without the environmental consequences of meat rearing, I'd definitely switch. I'd even pay a premium, though in reality it should rapidly become cheaper than the labor/land intensive meat industry.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#20

Post by futureastronaut »

dagw wrote: post #18
mantenpanther wrote: post #12

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 m…

But these are very artificial products and healthwise maybe not a good choice. Even if they actually are fine heathwise, it might be hard convincing people of that fact. My wife for example refuses to buy frozen ready made veggieburger patties and insists on making them from scratch because she wants to know what she's eating. There is no way you could convince here to buy these artificial meat substitutes over groun…

That's an argument you should be grateful to lose.
Post reply on HN