Any recommendations for a different good-tasting, ‘healthy’ milk alternative, then? Porridge or cereal with water is inedible...
what about just drinking water and eating berries? I kid you not, you will feel so much better.
Oatly: The New Coke?
51–60 of 429 posts
Re: Oatly: The New Coke?
#52Any recommendations for a different good-tasting, ‘healthy’ milk alternative, then? Porridge or cereal with water is inedible...
I've tried pretty much all variants of milk substitutes and found that they all disappoint me. The best way to enjoy porridge without milk is adding other flavors: mashed banana, raisins, cinnamon, grated apple, prunes, blueberries, cranberries, dried apricots... This goes for overnight oats as well.
Re: Oatly: The New Coke?
#53Not to appear petty, or to give the impression that I care about internet points (full disclosure: I am and I do), but I posted this on HN with the exact same title and link 3 hours ago. Wondering how this didn't get flagged as a dupe?
Probably because OP posted it twice, the first time was 19 hrs ago.
I guess that kind of makes sense, thanks :)
solemnly looks out window contemplating points that could have been
Re: Oatly: The New Coke?
#54Reminds me of this story: https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a29373/tobacco-an...
Re: Oatly: The New Coke?
#55Great write up on debunking oatly's "health benefits". But fails to mention the the moral reasons to choose oat milk over cow's milk. TBF lot of the meat replacements are plagued by similar problems. [1] [1] https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/impossible-and-beyond-ho...
Exactly what I had in mind. The article does not mention cow milk's health implications, and only focuses on debunking Oatly's alleged health benefits. This creates the same "Obscure the Truth" effect the article opens with, giving the impression that there's nothing wrong with cow milk. If both options are equally unhealthy (which is at the minimum the biased impression the article gives by not discussing cow milk),…
> The article does not mention cow milk's health implications, and only focuses on debunking Oatly's alleged health benefits
The article links to an entire other article discussing cow milk's health implications.
> If both options are equally unhealthy (which is at the minimum the biased impression the article gives by not discussing cow milk), at the minimum the moral one should be chosen.
Cow's milk and oat milk aren't the only two alternatives, though. Milk substitutes abound, some of them having much better health and moral implications (and as discussed in this thread, milk substitutes can be made at home).
Re: Oatly: The New Coke?
#56Re: Oatly: The New Coke?
#57Would compare them to Mountain Dew, but the headline wouldn’t look as good.
Re: Oatly: The New Coke?
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
What actual proven health implications does cows milk have?
Most people have some level of lactose malabsorption. Also cows milk has pretty grave health implications for the cows
I asked my vegan friends if they’d rather these animals would not exist at all rather than be used for milk production (because they are only bred into existence for that).
I wonder how that logic applies to humans born into living in rough countries, would vegans rather they would not exist at all?
It’s not like a dairy cow has a life of eternal suffering after all. It eats, grazes, rests and socializes. It does cow things.
Re: Oatly: The New Coke?
#59Great write up on debunking oatly's "health benefits". But fails to mention the the moral reasons to choose oat milk over cow's milk. TBF lot of the meat replacements are plagued by similar problems. [1] [1] https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/impossible-and-beyond-ho...
Moral and environmental. Milk is one level up from eating vegetables. Some milk consumption is probably sustainable, but we can't feed the entire world on quark cheese.
Re: Oatly: The New Coke?
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are you talking about? I am talking about the vegan diet in general. There is a lot of stuff you're excluding in that, not only milk. There is evidence that doing "manly stuff" for men, like hunting, increases testosterone production. Also a lot of food like red meat, eggs etc increases testosterone production. Something vegans don't eat.
So what you're saying is, vegan men are more likely to die with a healthy prostate and a full head of hair.
No, that is not what I am saying. I am saying that being vegan most likely results in lower testosterone, which is a basic hormone that is very important for males.
It is important for all aspects of mens health and well being, especially when you get older.