Live data from Hacker News

Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment (2018)

css.umich.edu

31–40 of 794 posts

Re: Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment (2018)

#31

That's good and all but the taste is still far off from normal. Impossible is a lot better but still not an exact fit.

It feels like they're on the right track, but after all the hype, I was a bit disappointed too. It has like a slightly odd oiliness that I didn't think I minded at first but ended up finding quite off-putting.

Probably the coconut oil, sunflower oil, cocoa butter, etc. They need something to make the white flecks and make the patty sizzle.

Re: Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment (2018)

#33
post #10

And if you’ve tried one, just about 99% less taste.

We all watched bad sci-fi growing up... right? Beyond burgers are what I imagine when the advanced microwave food creator machine spits out when I say I want a cheeseburger

And good sci fi!

Re: Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment (2018)

#34

>90% less greenhouse emissions, 99% less water, and 93% less land This was a great video concerning those claims above.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGG-A80Tl5g

This video is pure garbage. Detailed rebuttal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G44CDBdC8CA

There's a response to this rebuttal here:

https://www.patreon.com/posts/50919460

Re: Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment (2018)

#36
While it is not my experience at all, I understand that some folks have certain negative opinions of Beyond Burgers, and other fake meat/imitation burgers:

- The texture is off - Maybe they cook strangely - Potentially less taste

But the most important thing about them, and the reason I urge everyone to at least _try_ Beyond Burgers, is they require no violence against animals.

This is not an argument that fairs well on HN in general, but the fact that we can eat something this similar to a burger but without the slaughter of living, feeling, individual being is so unbelievably important and incredible.

Maybe you think the burger tastes different, or has a strange texture, but I certainly won't try to argue that because it doesn't matter. No one needed to die for you to eat it.

Re: Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment (2018)

#37

>90% less greenhouse emissions, 99% less water, and 93% less land This was a great video concerning those claims above.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGG-A80Tl5g

This video is pure garbage. Detailed rebuttal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G44CDBdC8CA

I just skimmed thru one video, mind giving me us the highlights? The argument that cows water requirements are mostly "green water" (i.e. rain that grows the crops they eat) seemed reasonable to me. So I have to imagine your "pure" garbage is a bit of hyperbole, but I am curious to understand which parts are wrong - hopefully without having to sift through more videos - thanks in advance

Re: Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment (2018)

#38
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great time to plug MSG... the delicious umami flavor wrapped up in one delish ingredient. I never used salt much growing up at home - we always used Aromat! I was shocked to learn that most of the world doesn't use Aromat! Everyone go buy Aromat! It's delicious but unfortunately seems to be mostly popular for Swiss and South Africans! It's perfect on tomatos

> This is a great time to plug MSG Is that the thing on the bottom of the label right before lark's vomit?

What are you talking about?

Re: Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment (2018)

#40
post #29

Land usage is a totally useless metric for the impact of beef production, because we can (and do) raise cattle on land that's basically useless for anything else.

But we use SO much land to grow the food that cattle eat. It's not a useless metric at all.
Post reply on HN