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

41–50 of 443 posts

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#41

Post by sametmax »

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…

> There is a ton of literal hatred for veganism and vegetarians in this world. Think of the practically cult-like following bacon has.

It's not that much hatred for veganism as rejection for something that is different in general.

The first vegans came mainly from outcast communities, like hippies, or pet lovers.

There is also the problem of feeling they are being judged: you'll often see somebody defensively saying "I could never be a vegan because of so and so" while nobody ever asked.

At last, we still live in a society with a macho touch, and meat is associated with being manly.

So really it's not about veganism, but about deeper issues from our society.

The fact there are more veggies and vegan today is a good news though: it means the society is becomming more tolerant, more open minded, and have the technology to support a less destructive lifestyle.

Like with every deep change in society, the best we can do is to help everybody get along and support each others. Cooking wars are just a symptom, and not the proper battle field.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#42

Post by chrisco255 »

yazboo wrote: post #39
lackbeard wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure the "hatred" towards vegans and vegetarians isn't actually hatred, but defensiveness. I think most meat-eaters wouldn't care about veganism and vegetarianism at all if there weren't so many vegans and vegetarians trying to moralize to the rest of world how they ought to be eating.

As a vegetarian who makes a point of being low key about it, not bringing it up unless asked, etc, there is almost endless judgment and questioning put forth in my direction. Every time I go out for a work lunch and order the black bean burger, or meatless sides at a BBQ joint or whatever, people want to dust off their freshman philosophy class ethical arguments. People with non-normative beliefs stand out from the n…

We'll look at WeWork, they banned their employees from expensing non-pescatarian meals. I think you'd be hard pressed to find an example of an employer who banned their employees from expensing vegan meals.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#43

Post by perplamps »

JasonFruit wrote: post #27

Maybe it's my rural background and associations, but I see a powerful psychological effect to eating meat from a real animal, and that won't disappear because some meat substitute tastes pretty good. I like falafel, I like shiitake mushrooms, I like a good veggie burger, but there's no substitute for the flesh of an animal — especially one I raised, where I know its diet, its experiences, and how it was slaughtered a…

> there's no substitute for the flesh of an animal — especially one I raised, where I know its diet, its experiences, and how it was slaughtered and butchered

When PG said eating meat might sound perverse one day, it's hard to imagine how a comment like this might come across. I'm not a vegetarian and even I find it difficult to differentiate between the above justifications and the ravings of a serial killer.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#44

Post by redisman »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #16

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, th…

Funnily enough low quality patties like fast food burgers have been using more soy protein as a filler for a long time. Maybe one day they'll be honest and sell it as 50% vegetarian burgers or something.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#45

Post by Broken_Hippo »

paulcole wrote: post #31
mattmanser wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 deliv…

I think you’re very wrong. Vegans/Vegetarians are still sneered at in the US. Any non major city/college town in the South/Midwest is still dominated by meat and the associated culture. Thanksgiving alone is a nearly insurmountable hurdle. “Tofurky” is still a gross joke to most people. You and PG are both vastly underestimating the emotional attachment people have to their current way of life.

I lived in Indiana from birth until my mid-30's. I've lived another nearly 6 years in Norway.

And sure, most menus were dominated by meat when I left and they are here as well. I'm not completely vegetarian - I eat fish. And honestly, it was easier to find veggie options in Indiana than fish options. But it wasn't too horrible either. Most folks didn't find my eating habits a big deal, even if I just ate the appetiser. A few assholes made fun of others, but that's the case with anything. And it has only gotten better with time.

I don't see how it is a big deal with "Tofurky". Don't eat it. Lots of meat products are like this too.

Most folks aren't that emotionally attached to their meat if they can make it with something else. Foods have trends - the candy isle is full of these trends as are Oreo flavors. Oreos, by the way, have changed greatly over the years - they used to have lard in them and people are still eating them. But folks can still eat their beloved oreos - I don't know why meat would be any different save for the few that decided to be really into meat.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#46

Post by benj111 »

jessaustin wrote: post #10

Would substitute meat be cheaper than regular meat? Sure, the inputs might be cheaper eventually, but it's not as if the firm that solves the riddle will simply give their IP to competitors.

Depends.

Animals are inefficient at turning plants into meat, so from an energy inputs point of view you'd expect the substitutes to be cheaper. But then farming is heavily subsidised, and we don't know what competitive advantages the substitute companies will end up having.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#47

Post by rjf72 »

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…

In most (all?) states in the US selling hunted game, such as deer or boar, is illegal.

Conflicted opinions on this. I very strongly support the right to hunt, and also find it vastly more humane for the animals. On top of this I also tend to take a libertarian slant on most things. However, in this specific case you have a textbook tragedy of the commons waiting to happen. The reason game is so widespread is specifically because of these laws. When it was legal to hunt and sell game meat/products we hunted numerous species far beyond sustainability.

Maybe one solution would be to offer limited vouchers that enable an individual hunter to market some fixed amount of game -- not all that different from how wild fishing/crabbing/etc is handled. But I think it's clear that without extremely judicious management here you'd likely see over-hunting rapidly take hold, and that's no good for hunter, animal, or society.

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#49

Post by dagw »

rjf72 wrote: post #47
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…

In most (all?) states in the US selling hunted game, such as deer or boar, is illegal. Conflicted opinions on this. I very strongly support the right to hunt, and also find it vastly more humane for the animals. On top of this I also tend to take a libertarian slant on most things. However, in this specific case you have a textbook tragedy of the commons waiting to happen. The reason game is so widespread is specific…

Doesn't the US already have hunting seasons and quotas?

Re: Paul Graham on the Transition to Meat Substitutes

#50

Post by ksec »

>Cheaper and Tasted Better

Sure, if you can make a Burger that tasted better than average Burger made with Real Angus USDA Choice, preserving all its protein and nutrition benefits, healthy while being cheaper. I am all for it.

( Lots of Meats Subs ( Not just Burgers ) tends to Add other ingredient making taste or looks better, but in reality aren't as healthy to consume as compared to Meat. I can see the Market force will drive Meats Sub to lower cost while being more like process, unhealthy type of food, which kind of defeat the purpose. )

This has added benefits to Supply Chain where Cattle has a long lead time to slaughter and don't adopt well to sudden demand. Compare to possibly mass manufacture plant based Meat Sub.

The problem is I have yet to taste any Meat Substitutes that is remotely close to being as good as meat. They are good I won't mind having them, but given the choice I would pick meat any day.

And all of them were comparatively pricy. If these Meat Subs aren't at least 30%+ cheaper while being as good or better tasting , it will remain in a niche for those non-veg people. I think the price to quality is something we won't see in the next 10 years. And getting people to changes its attitudes will take even longer than that.

Post reply on HN