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

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

css.umich.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 794 posts

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

#291

Post by varajelle »

colordrops wrote: post #104
ipaddr wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why would you want to replicate the outcome of a slaughter if that part of the process upsets you? Why make an apple taste like the death of a cow? For me eating things in their most natural forms seems more appealing. I don't know what is in beyond meat but avoiding processed anything seems like a more healthy strategy.

Because we are natural meat eaters and still have strong cravings for meat even if we don't eat it. Eating a close facsimile can help those satisfy those cravings and avoid a rebound to eating real meat.

This "natural" argument does not make sense. You know what else is natural? Rape. Men are natural rapist, they like to have sex with any woman, if they have carving to do it, its all ok if they do it.

... Aren't we better than that?

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

#292

Post by atweiden »

tomcam wrote: post #264
sweetheart wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get the feel that you're having a go, no worries :) I think there are two parts to this: we can't raise the animals that folks want to eat without _also_ growing plants to feed those animals, so from my perspective it seems that we can apply most or all points about the negatives of cropping to the cropping that is done to support animal agriculture. So if cropping is bad, it's still bad when we do it for the…

I feel you. I stopped eating meat for 40 years for the same reason. But... they are on the same food chain we are, and they’d eat us in a heartbeat, right?

> I feel you. I stopped eating meat for 40 years for the same reason. But... they are on the same food chain we are, and they’d eat us in a heartbeat, right?

Herbivorous ruminants like cows would never eat you, and would generally never harm you unless provoked. Breeding intelligent lifeforms in a bespoke way to murder them for cash — whatever the reason or creature involved — is diabolically evil. If you do this for a living, you’re a merchant of death in my book.

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

#293

Post by Jack000 »

King-Aaron wrote: post #166
fastball wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My interpretation was more: nature doesn't have morality, animals don't have morality, other animals aren't worried about killing each other, the only reason we are worried about it is because we are projecting the horror of death that comes from being a cognizant being onto animals that are unlikely to even have a concept of "death", so it's not a moral conundrum for an animal that has evolved to eat meat (humans) t…

This is kind of it. I also find it a frustrating American-centric/urban-centric point of view that 'killing animals is bad', when I (among others) have grown up in areas where it's a basic part of life to farm/hunt meat for survival.

I grew up in an area with "traditional" slaughter techniques. Basically a hog is tied down and its throat is slit, while alive, the animal's heart pumps the blood out into a bucket. This ensures the blood doesn't remain in the meat, which makes it taste gamey. The screaming and thrashing of the pig will haunt you for days but the meat definitely tastes better.

Anyways, I dislike the utilitarian/primitist argument because you can justify any number of cruelties with an appeal to nature. Cats play with their food all the time so why can't we torture animals for fun?

Humans should ponder the morality of killing animals because we have the will and ability to do so.

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

#294

Post by jandrewrogers »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #259
jandrewrogers wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, I thought the Impossible Burger clearly tasted like heavily processed legumes, not like meat. I grew up in one of the major legume growing regions of the US and was raised on them in a part of the world where the local food culture knows how to get the most out of them. It is very satisfying when done right, and I eat far more than the average American to this day, but no one would confuse it with meat. Impossi…

To each their own. I completely disagree, in that the Impossible Burger, and to a lesser degree the Beyond Burger, are the first vegetarian products I've eaten that completely satiate my desire for meat, and I really like the taste with good seasoning, ketchup and mustard. I've eaten many veggie burgers previously, whether they be bean, soy, or mushroom based, and always after eating one I felt like it tasted OK, but…

The preparation may matter. For example, I don’t put ketchup and mustard on my burgers, which will probably disguise a lot of the processed legume taste. I don’t use strongly flavored sauces.

For reasons I don’t understand, some of the most satisfying unintentionally vegetarian food I’ve eaten has been in the agriculture regions of the US, like the Palouse, where legumes are ubiquitous local crops. Popular vegetarian cooking has never picked up those recipes, which are much better to my taste than what passes as a lot of vegetarian fare. I’ll go for months as a vegetarian but I cook my own food, leaning heavily on the cuisine of regions that aren’t vegetarian per se but nonetheless produce surprisingly satisfying vegetarian dishes based on legumes. I’ve convinced far more meat eaters with these dishes than with fake meat.

It’s a marketing gap. A lot of vegetarian cooking is biased towards a sweet/sour/starchy flavor profile; people that don’t like those flavors in their food generally are on their own, the alternatives are not well represented.

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

#295

Post by hliyan »

Gustomaximus wrote: post #191
sweetheart wrote: post #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…

> Beyond Burgers, is they require no violence against animals. I find this interesting, in that cropping has plenty of violent against animals but one step removed. I have a small cattle property, we run on hill country with diversified ecosystem, mixed grass and bushland. We have a heap of native animals living across the property. And at the end of the day the steers do get sent of for slaughter after 18 to 24 mont…

Really appreciate this perspective and the info. But I do think we shouldn't let perfection be the enemy of good here. Anything that moves the needle in the right direction should be encouraged.

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

#296

Post by __jem »

acituan wrote: post #283
sweetheart wrote: post #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…

> I urge everyone to at least _try_ Beyond Burgers, is they require no violence against animals. I understand what you mean by violence and I don't want to come across as a stickler just for sport, but if we are taking a hard ethical stance based on principles we need to be precise with categories. Two of which is most important; 1. category of animals include humans 2. category of violence include any suffering infl…

i don’t understand why you think this is a huge gotcha. most vegans are oriented around harm reduction, not absolute minimization. otherwise, they’d just kill themselves. there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism, etc.

either way, the causal chain between me and the rotisserie chicken is far shorter than between me and the tiny bit of cobalt in my iphone.

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

#297

Post by tomcam »

vinni2 wrote: post #284
tomcam wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel you. I stopped eating meat for 40 years for the same reason. But... they are on the same food chain we are, and they’d eat us in a heartbeat, right?

Good point except we are the woke moral and intelligent beings?

That’s a pretty compelling argument of course.

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

#298

Post by neuro_image2 »

I am an avid meat-lover but it does play on my conscience that I am in fact eating a former sentient being and potentially contributing to environmental devastation.

I would appreciate answers to the following two, albeit simplistic questions that always plaque me when I consider stopping eating meat products:

1) Is it really unethical to eat animals when the natural trajectory of most animals lives was likely to be eaten by other animals or die some horrendous death in their natural environment? Isn't it better for an animal to live its best life on a free range farm being grass fed, then get quickly and humanely slaughtered?

2)If I made a personal decision to stop eating meat, would there be any significant impact at all on the overall environment realistically? For example, I recently watched the documentary Seaspiracy which showed the negative effects of commercial fishing. However, the reality is that me (not) eating a bowl of sashimi once a week makes no difference in the context of, say, countries like Japan slaughtering millions of fish daily (regardless of any change in behavior on my part or my small circle of influence)?

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

#299

Post by markonen »

The local burger joint closest to my house is 100% vegan and uses Beyond patties. It’s also, in my opinion, the best burger in town.

I’m a carnivore and would definitely notice the difference in a Pepsi challenge of the patties themselves, but the overall taste and presentation make this place pull ahead of all the meat-based alternatives.

I feel like we’ve crossed a threshold. This was literal sci-fi just a couple of years ago.

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

#300

Post by spicymaki »

fastball wrote: post #139
agogdog wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And as a predatory animal, the fact that something "needs to die" for me to feed doesn't factor into the equation. I'm having a hard time following this... are you saying that you don't think about the reality of killing animals for food because of some biological mechanism outside of your control?

My interpretation was more: nature doesn't have morality, animals don't have morality, other animals aren't worried about killing each other, the only reason we are worried about it is because we are projecting the horror of death that comes from being a cognizant being onto animals that are unlikely to even have a concept of "death", so it's not a moral conundrum for an animal that has evolved to eat meat (humans) t…

No! Lions eat to survive and do not have choices due to evolution. Humans on the other hand can choose how to source their nutrients.

I don’t believe that animals eating animals in an abstract sense is wrong. The problem for me is necessity and scale. We don’t need animal protein to survive and the scale of the death and environmental harm is too much to ignore.

Post reply on HN