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

341–350 of 794 posts

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

#341

Post by vel0city »

name_nick_sex_m wrote: post #197
paranoidrobot wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they require no violence against animals. While I sympathise with the argument, I think that it's a mistake to push this aspect front and centre. There's a whole lot of people out there who simply like eating meat, and that it means killing an animal is not particularly a problem. The people I've spoken to about Beyond/Impossible and similar fake-meats all tend to think of it as something for vegans/vegetarians, be…

I disagree. While there will no doubt be friction, people should be confronted with the reality of their choices; long term we can't preserve their bubble of ignorance, might as well address it now

I mean, its not always ignorance. I understand meat has massively more impact on the environment in many metrics. I still enjoy meat products and tend to eat them from time to time. There's things I enjoy about those products, even though there are externalities. If there's a product out there which can offset most of those externalities and still satiate that same kind of experience, I'll pay a few more bucks for it. Hopefully, many more similar people to me will as well, and maybe we'll even make it cost effective to offset most of that highly impactful meat eating with something that more people find agreeable.

Its way better for the environment if I never purchased a car or even a bicycle and I just walked everywhere. My environmental impact would probably be lower. But in the end I'm going to buy some kind of vehicle, because I enjoy what buying a car gets me.

Its way better for me to never eat meat, but in the end I enjoy what eating meat gives me. I can massively reduce my impact on the Earth living naked foraging berries and roots and never traveling farther than I can walk but in the end there are things I enjoy and will end up doing them despite the externalities. I'm going to own an air conditioner and I'm going to run it. This has externalities and would be better for the environment if it was never made and was never run. I'm going to own a refridgerator and run it. This has externalities and would be better for the environment if it was never made and never run. I'm typing this on a computer which will eventually go into a landfill and probably become some trace amount of toxic waste. In the end, I still managed to get usage out of it and find value from it while its useful. The only way to have no impact on the Earth is to never exist.

Its nice having the option to do things which give most of the same experience while reducing the externalities. I'll buy the refrigerator which is more efficient. I'll buy the right size AC system for my home to cool it as effectively as possible I'll maintain all my appliances to give as long as a serviceable live as possible. And I'll buy what gives me similar experiences to what I enjoy for food that reduces my impact on the Earth.

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

#342

Post by Matumio »

ipaddr wrote: post #170

I'm generally surprised no one brings up the negative health benefits of processed foods. It is not healthier to get rid of meat only to replace it with high salt chemically processed food that tastes like meat. It seems like we are going backwards. You know what uses less greenhouse emissions, less water and less land? The orginal plant based food that gets processed into a beyond burger. If you really care about th…

You seem to throw all food processing into the same pot, so to speak. Humans have an under-developed digestion system. Why? Because they can pre-process their foods to compensate. They know that some plants are poisonous unless cooked, for example.

And obviously, few food-processing factories or bulk shipping methods of ingredients cause enough greenhouse gasses that you can just eat local meat instead, if you care about your footprint. Saying that none of this is solving a real problem is wishful thinking.

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

#343

Post by hervature »

neuro_image2 wrote: post #298

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…

I think danShumway answered 1) pretty well. I just wanted to add my opinion about 2).

Nothing an individual does in terms of personal behavior can have any "significant impact" at a global scale. If all humans made decisions like this, we would all come to the same conclusion, none of our individual actions are responsible. Which, while true, is ultimately a useless conclusion. I'd rather that we as a collective change our fundamental behavior for the better instead of governments imposing on our lives. If all governments decided tomorrow to ban all meat products, the world would undoubtedly be in a much better place. You also mention second order effects (small circle of influence) but even that is marginal. Being a vegan, I believe I've "converted" (just by exposing them to an alternative lifestyle) two people to vegetarian.

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

#344

Post by toper-centage »

danShumway wrote: post #232
Gustomaximus wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

This is a complicated topic, with multiple responses, but I'm only going to touch on one specific aspect of it. Reducing violence in regular farming is an admirable goal that people should strive towards. It's also worth talking about the environmental costs of ingredients like palm oil, and it's worth talking about the human costs of products like cocoa. I don't mean to diminish any of that at all, it's all worth pa…

There was a post of the front-page of reddit a few days ago saying that most Americans are lied to about the fish they are buying in restaurants and supermarkets. I think it hilarious when people like me, urban dwellers, tell me to my face they only buy meat from some small butcher because they only trust him, or some variation of that story. Truth is, we have no idea where our food comes from, labels lie, and sellers have all the incentive to manipulate the truth.

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

#345

Post by jb_gericke »

atweiden wrote: post #292
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?

> 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…

I've been feeling more conflicted about consuming meat lately, but it's blanket assertions like this that trigger my inner libertarian hard, and I come out swinging. There is considerable evidence suggesting meat consumption contributed significantly to our cerebral expansion (https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/701477?mob...). Unlike most great apes today, whose diet is primarily plant based, we can thank the incredible nutrient density in meat and our incredible hunting and tool creating ability for prefrontal cortex development. Humans are alpha predators, more so than any other animal in the world. We were pack hunters, forging tools and strategies capable of taking down mammoths. Call it 'diabolicaly evil' if you want, but this is simply nature and survival. Eat solely plants without supplementation and you will become deficient in B12 and iron (amongst other things, contributing to early age mortality). I don't personally believe highly processed plant alternatives such as Beyond meat are a long term option if you're even vaguely interested in your own health. So call me evil, I see myself as a pragmatist, more in touch with nature than you are. I recognize the alpha predator in myself. I lift weights, consume lean, well sourced and organic meat. I've hunted and eaten what I've killed as my forebears. I'm resilient and healthy. If that makes me diabolical I'll take it.

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

#347

Post by toper-centage »

rallison wrote: post #224
Gustomaximus wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

It's definitely true that just switching over to plant-based foods and away from animal-based foods won't solve all the issues, it's also worth noting that a lot of cattle, at least in the US, are not raised on a foraging model, so most feed that cattle consume come from plants raised elsewhere, which are going to largely be those same cropping properties. And, further, the amount of feed to raise cattle mean that th…

To add to that, even grass fed, free range animals are often fed more grain at the end of their lives so the grow quicker in the last couple months.

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

#348

Post by King-Aaron »

Jack000 wrote: post #293
King-Aaron wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 bec…

We certainly are lucky to live in a society of plenty where we can make the moral decision on how or what we eat. I don't have any negative thoughts against people who completely opt out of eating meat for that reason.

But just to comment on your first point, we would never let an animal suffer like that when we grew up. A quick shot to the temple to switch it off immediately, and then cut and hang the meat to bleed out worked just as well for us.

Don't get me wrong, we were always taught to minimise any suffering and to give our livestock the best/healthiest/least stressful lives possible, and to treat them with dignity when you needed them for food.

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

#349

Post by doodirock »

name_nick_sex_m wrote: post #197
paranoidrobot wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they require no violence against animals. While I sympathise with the argument, I think that it's a mistake to push this aspect front and centre. There's a whole lot of people out there who simply like eating meat, and that it means killing an animal is not particularly a problem. The people I've spoken to about Beyond/Impossible and similar fake-meats all tend to think of it as something for vegans/vegetarians, be…

I disagree. While there will no doubt be friction, people should be confronted with the reality of their choices; long term we can't preserve their bubble of ignorance, might as well address it now

Um... Now you sound like the one who is ignorant. Not everyone thinks killing an animal for food is some terrible blight on the world. I have zero issues with it and no amount of "but they're living things and so cute" is going to change that fact.

It's exactly this type of nonsense that gets people to turn away from meat like products. We don't need a lecture about sad little animals every time we order a delicious smash burger.

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

#350

Post by atweiden »

neuro_image2 wrote: post #298

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…

> 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?

The ethical base of factory farming starts off equivalent with putting a wild animal into a zoo cage for the remainder of its life against its natural will to have freedom. Tack off some “ethical” points for the misery of its living conditions, which are almost universally terrible. Tack off still more ethics points for systematic premeditated murder on a commercial scale for profit.

> 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?

As someone who has lived in an area with heavy animal agriculture, “free range” basically translates to “cram as many $ANIMALS as we legally can into an area modulo our budget, and then neglect them to every extent allowable by law, followed by murdering them in cold blood because we need money”. IOW “free range” is sick, twisted marketing that doesn’t reflect reality.

> If I made a personal decision to stop eating meat, would there be any significant impact at all on the overall environment realistically?

Nothing matters more than money to animal agriculture operations. Don’t underestimate the power of taking your money elsewhere.

The rest of your commentary is more a critique of human overpopulation, and the myriad problems this poses.

Post reply on HN