A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals • Hacker News Board

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#261

Post by KitDuncan » Fri, Oct 04, 2019, 5:58 AM UTC

OJFord wrote: post #86

mikepurvis wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I often choose the vegetarian option when eating out simply because I know how to grill a steak or roast some chicken at home— I can make those meals just as well as they can, and for half the cost or less. When I see multiple vegetarian meal options, that's a signal that the chef isn't just doing a low effort protein swap-out but is actually offering something tasty and interesting, and I'm interested to try it.

> When I see multiple vegetarian meal options, that's a signal that [...] I use whether it's called something like 'vegetarian ' (as a signal for the reverse). I don't want a 'vegetarian lasagne', or 'vegetarian burger'. A slightly different but similarly ridiculous one is 'vegetarian chili con carne', which means 'vegetarian chili with meat'.

We just call that chili sin carne. I gave it to my non-vegan family and they couldn't tell the difference. It's a really great dish, quick to make (faster and easier than with meat), healthy, high in protein and tasty.

I really don't get what the issue is here? There are also great bean/nut/mushroom burgers, that don't intend to taste like meat burgers.

Why can't vegan dishes use the same form factor as non-veg dishes? Does everything just have to be a bland plate of veggies for us?

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#262

Post by collyw » Fri, Oct 04, 2019, 7:10 AM UTC

Majestic121 wrote: post #82

jacknews wrote: post #66

The thing is, you don't need to be entirely vegetarian to have a big impact on your environmental footprint, etc. Many meals can do well, or even be improved, by having 'much less meat'. After all, meat has been a sign of prosperity for a long time, and so it's been stuffed into many recipes that probably don't need it, or that need much less of it than curretly practiced. 'less-itarian', if you like.

There's actually a word for what you describe : flexitarian

I thought flaxitarian was more part-time vegan. My vegetarian friend uses it when he changes his mind and wants some meat.

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#263

Post by gridlockd » Fri, Oct 04, 2019, 7:59 AM UTC

athriren wrote: post #257

gridlockd wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All life leads to death, in nature or captivity. Pretty much any animal will be eaten upon death, by predators, scavengers, or microbes. Sometimes it will be killed to be eaten. Death follows wild animals at every step. Captive animals can live better lives than wild animals. They can be treated well. That's my premise. You can have the position that either such life is just meaningless suffering and that its non-exi…

But the purpose of a wild animal is not to be killed and eaten. I’m not convinced you could accurately describe in words what the purpose of a wild animal is. However, it is easy to describe what the purpose of beef cattle. It is to be killed and be eaten by the same animal who has bred them to have high muscle content and caged them. “Captive” animals is entirely too broad a class. Pets have great lives much of the…

> But the purpose of a wild animal is not to be killed and eaten. I’m not convinced you could accurately describe in words what the purpose of a wild animal is.

A wild animal doesn't have a purpose. It just is. It will die and it will get eaten anyway.

> However, it is easy to describe what the purpose of beef cattle. It is to be killed and be eaten by the same animal who has bred them to have high muscle content and caged them.

Fair enough.

> I am talking about animals bred and raised for human consumption only, and I do believe those lives are meaningless suffering based on the goal of that life.

Feeding some other being isn't entirely meaningless. Also, if the animal was living the best life it could live, is it still suffering? If so, then all life is suffering.

> Extending the argument, if a person were birthed solely to be an organ farm for a wealthy individual, that would also be meaningless suffering even if they were treated “well” for most of their life.

That's the plot of "The Island". Obviously, it sounds morally repulsive, but from the perspective of such a life lived subjectively, it's better than most lives lived throughout human history.

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#264

Post by loceng » Fri, Oct 04, 2019, 1:38 PM UTC

KitDuncan wrote: post #260

loceng wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most food related research is this terribly done - and of course the research that supports strong ideologies with a growing follower base reach the top.

The livestock industry invests billions of dollars into heavily biased studies and lately I feel like you hear a lot more about health benefits of Keto than Veganism... I think in general there is a lot less profit to be made with Veganism, it would surprise me if there was a stronger propaganda campaign then the one from the livestock industry.

If you can cite actual evidence to backup anything you've said then sure, I'd consider it more in my own arguments.

Ketogenic diet has very noticeable health benefits and where you won't easily be nutrient deficient. Veganism in contrast you hear stories regularly that over time some people develop health issues - is it because of the diet or something else underlying - we don't know, no one's studied it properly.

The growing counterpoint to veganism - a lot of which are people doing it for ideological reasons - from my observation is to counter the growing hate and intolerance against people who eat animals. Hunting and eating animals is a natural part of our evolution and to deny that is denying evolution; only psychopaths don't care about causing unnecessary suffering, everyone else would rather abolish factory farming where abuse is ripe and extreme. The carnivore diet is starting to trend, animal-only diet, and badly done research painting meat in a bad light is being debunked.

The place where there's no profit to be made, regarding rapid, healthy weight loss - which is water fasting; there's no profit motive to promote water fasting in the mainstream. Otherwise if there is profit to be made, and bad actors involved, then there will be propaganda being generated - and it will be the crowd who spread the content they produce, that content which doesn't cost a lot to produce - and is free to distribute especially when you design the results, the writing, to align with beliefs of members of a group.

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#265

Post by mikepurvis » Fri, Oct 04, 2019, 2:47 PM UTC

KitDuncan wrote: post #261

OJFord wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I see multiple vegetarian meal options, that's a signal that [...] I use whether it's called something like 'vegetarian ' (as a signal for the reverse). I don't want a 'vegetarian lasagne', or 'vegetarian burger'. A slightly different but similarly ridiculous one is 'vegetarian chili con carne', which means 'vegetarian chili with meat'.

We just call that chili sin carne. I gave it to my non-vegan family and they couldn't tell the difference. It's a really great dish, quick to make (faster and easier than with meat), healthy, high in protein and tasty. I really don't get what the issue is here? There are also great bean/nut/mushroom burgers, that don't intend to taste like meat burgers. Why can't vegan dishes use the same form factor as non-veg dishe…

I can't speak for the parent, but my feeling about it is that I don't like food pretending to be other food. So yes, serve me up a mushroom burger or a falafel burger, or a winter black bean and kale burger. But if the menu says simply "veggie burger" then there's a pretty good sign that it's an imitation and not made from whole food.

Now, none of this is implying that the veggie meal should be a "bland plate of veggies", rather it's that there are whole cuisines out there with delicious plant-based meals that have stood the test of time. If I'm eating vegetarian, I want one of those meals, not a meat meal with the meat swapped out.

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#266

Post by blue_devil » Fri, Oct 04, 2019, 6:53 PM UTC

Seems like the effect size for price was the biggest - people were getting vegetarian meals more when they cost less.

From the appendix (page 6) here: https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/suppl/2019/09/25/190720711...

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#267

Post by teddyh » Fri, Oct 04, 2019, 8:37 PM UTC

mtalantikite wrote: post #136

belorn wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, and in particular with conference food, vegetarian dishes has its own food culture and tastes. To be specific they usually do not include any pepper, garlic, chili, or herbs like parsley, sage, rosemary, thyme and cumin. Salt and umami is also often missing. Instead the cooks tries to create tastes through using different grains, seeds, fruits, salads and vegetables. Food without meat does not have…

Vegetarian in NYC here. There are plenty of spices used in vegetarian food. Maybe non-veg chefs in the west don’t know how to spice food, but there are tons of spices used in veg dishes from all over the world. Typically I can judge how a restaurant is going to be if I look at the veg options on a menu — good chefs certainly know how to use spices and how to cook vegetables.

“You’ve just never had good wine.”

https://www.xkcd.com/915/

Every time a conference (yes, in the “western” world) has had a vegetarian food option, or proudly proclaims that their only food option is vegetarian, it has uniformly consisted of bland, barely edible, mush. I don’t really care why that is, and I don’t think this can be fixed by something I can realistically do.

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#268

Post by loco5niner » Fri, Oct 04, 2019, 9:27 PM UTC

ohbleek wrote: post #206

jedimastert wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

POV: Omnivore with a (previously) vegetarian spouse. We generally ate veg @ home One of my biggest issues with modern veg diets is all of the veg food trying to masquerade as other food. Soy bacon does not taste like, or taste as good as, real bacon. Tofu and Boca burgers do not taste like actual meat. But tofu and the like can taste amazing on its own merit . It's an ingredient with it's own flavors and textures, so…

I get so tired of this argument. If you were raised eating meat then you'll likely have tendencies to eat meals based around meat. Meat substitutes make sense in the current world and given the typical diet of western cultures. It doesn't have to taste just like the meat it mocks, it just has to taste good. There is nothing special about the taste of chicken or beef other than it is good and you're used to it. If som…

> It doesn't have to taste just like the meat it mocks, it just has to taste good

You just made the same argument you are attempting to argue against.

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#269

Post by OJFord » Sat, Oct 05, 2019, 5:21 PM UTC

KitDuncan wrote: post #261

OJFord wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I see multiple vegetarian meal options, that's a signal that [...] I use whether it's called something like 'vegetarian ' (as a signal for the reverse). I don't want a 'vegetarian lasagne', or 'vegetarian burger'. A slightly different but similarly ridiculous one is 'vegetarian chili con carne', which means 'vegetarian chili with meat'.

We just call that chili sin carne. I gave it to my non-vegan family and they couldn't tell the difference. It's a really great dish, quick to make (faster and easier than with meat), healthy, high in protein and tasty. I really don't get what the issue is here? There are also great bean/nut/mushroom burgers, that don't intend to taste like meat burgers. Why can't vegan dishes use the same form factor as non-veg dishe…

I don't have a problem with the form of food itself, it's just that 'vegetarian burger' tells me only what it isn't, it could be (almost) anything!

I wouldn't buy a 'vegeterian ' for the same reason I wouldn't buy a 'meat ' - it just sounds crap and like you don't know what you've made you just knew you needed a vegetarian (resp. meat) option.

Re: A rise in vegetarian options leads customers to embrace meat-free meals

#270

Post by distant_hat » Sat, Oct 05, 2019, 9:34 PM UTC

KitDuncan wrote: post #259

distant_hat wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know plenty of vegetarians and a few vegans. While vegetarians do relative okay especially if they eat eggs, the vegans are forever talking about supplements and are fatigued and look like 60 by the time they are in their 40s.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Those are anecdotes and it sounds like you're biased. There are plenty of athletes on a vegan diet. Sure we take B12, but plenty of omnivores are deficient as well. The only reason you get more of that is because it's supplemented to livestock. My blood tests came back absolutely stellar and I eat whatever I want most days. When it comes to sports, I can easily compete wit…

Just describing what I see. I don't disagree that there may be a few people who do fine with it, in general, it is a huge overhead to make sure you are getting enough as a vegan. As a omnivore you can grab that steak and go.