Beyond Meat’s Beyond Burger life cycle assessment (2018) • Hacker News Board

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

#381

Post by dev_tty01 » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:18 AM UTC

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 absolutely respect your choices and your opinion, but I don't understand them. Is the wolf diabolically evil? No cash involved of course. Is that the issue? What if I hunt the animal and kill it and then consume it, like the lion, the tiger, the hawk, and the dolphin? Is the hunter morally superior to the farmer who raises a steer, providing clean water, well grassed pasture, and then kills in a humane manner for personal consumption? Is that diabolically evil? What about the middle man who makes some cash bringing the meat product to someone else who can use it. Is that where the evilness enters the picture?

I am asking the fundamental question. I will agree completely that large scale food production has some real problems with animal treatment. I'm not defending or commenting on that. I'm just trying to understand the moral judgements associated with consuming another animal, as is done at just about all levels of the food chain in the natural world. Our digestive systems, our teeth, our nutritional requirements are all tuned to omnivorous consumption. Why is it wrong to exercise our natural nutritional choices, plant and animal, that have resulted from millions of years of evolution?

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

#382

Post by lambdaba » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:18 AM UTC

toper-centage wrote: post #367

lambdaba wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seed oils. See Dr. Cate Shanahan.

Better than animal fat

That's just wrong. Inform yourself on the history of where the saturated fat scare comes from and the disastrous consequences on global health.

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

#383

Post by oliwarner » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:18 AM UTC

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…

It doesn't need to though.

https://www.soilassociation.org/take-action/organic-living/w...

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

#384

Post by toper-centage » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:19 AM UTC

aqsalose wrote: post #263

purephase wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well shit, the taste is slightly off so let's keep killing billions of sentient animals.

I was introduced to the "Hard Problem of Consciousness" some 10 years ago in high school philosophy class, and have been mulling over it ever since. Today I am sympathetic to Dennett's argument in Consciousness Explained: there is no single Cartesian theater, there are several processes in the brain which are the same thing (up to the precision of definition of same) as we internally experience, and many properties w…

People have always killed other people. Some people even eat other people. And we let them. Have you tried to convince a lion to eat a soy gazelle? I suppose not, because of the strong language barrier. They would probably not digest it very well, as they are real carnivores. My point is, we are capable of having this complex discussion with several points of view and your whole reasoning is "animals eat animals, why shouldnt I?".

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

#385

Post by tomp » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:20 AM UTC

babyshake wrote: post #176

dcolkitt wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the difference would be though, that without the demand for meat, those cows would likely never have lived at all. 99%+ of all cows alive are used for human agriculture. From the perspective of any living creature, I generally think of existence as a positive good versus non-existence. I know I certainly would rather come to a violent death at a young age than have never been born at all. I think there's a pl…

There is a very good argument to be made that the life of cows on factory farms is worse than never existing.

There was an article on Slate Star Codex that examined this issue in detail. The conclusion was the opposite - basically that life is worth it even if living in extremely poor conditions - as evidenced by accounts of human survivors of e.g. concentration camps (the majority still wanted to continue living, and even engaged in normal human activities like love and procreation).

https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/12/11/acc-is-eating-meat-a-n...

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

#386

Post by tomp » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:21 AM UTC

dcolkitt wrote: post #76

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 guess the difference would be though, that without the demand for meat, those cows would likely never have lived at all. 99%+ of all cows alive are used for human agriculture. From the perspective of any living creature, I generally think of existence as a positive good versus non-existence. I know I certainly would rather come to a violent death at a young age than have never been born at all. I think there's a pl…

I had to scroll 1/3 down the page before finally finding this argument.

Simply said, for cows, eating meat means murder. Not eating meat means extinction.

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

#387

Post by lambdaba » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:24 AM UTC

toper-centage wrote: post #359

lambdaba wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seed oils are toxic. These fake "meats" are the some of the worst processed foods around. It's sad people are being duped once again by the food industry and medical establishment. This will only further worsen the awful health of the population.

Also, do you have more on thst "seed oils are toxic"? Literally never heard about that.

See this for the example https://youtu.be/ZdhywL6icZU

There is a ton of info, just look around. Also, what is the common ingredient in all processed foods? This is what is making people fat. Omega-6 integrates in body fat, easily oxidized and unstable, rendering our own fat inaccessible for energy, so we're chronically hungry, tired, and inflamed. Than add in sugar and salt for hyperpalability. We've been hacked.

Seed oils are nothing more than industrial waste sold as food for profits.

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

#388

Post by ceras » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:25 AM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #257

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…

All living things die and are eaten by other living things. This isn’t wrong, it is the way nature works. Would you have every living thing just...stay alive forever? That’s not going to happen.

The main moral problem with meat consumption, to me, is not the killing - everything dies, you're right. It's rather how awfully the animals are treated both throughout their leaves, and also (in most cases) the slaughter process. It's really a horror show, and far worse than their natural lives would be. Not a life anyone would willingly be born into.

Almost all meat comes from such inhumane factory farms with terrible conditions. For the animals treated the worst (chickens) there seems to be almost no moment of their life without suffering. They're even bred with genes that guarantee pain (due to extremely fast growth and egg laying cycles), because that makes it cheaper.

If we had higher standards, this moral argument would be less concerning. But the standards needed to treat animals at least passably well would make meat far more expensive, which is not politically palatable. Better meat alternatives are the best path forward here.

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

#389

Post by lambdaba » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:26 AM UTC

toper-centage wrote: post #357

lambdaba wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seed oils are toxic. These fake "meats" are the some of the worst processed foods around. It's sad people are being duped once again by the food industry and medical establishment. This will only further worsen the awful health of the population.

I never understood beyond for a health product though. Is that really their branding?

That's people's perception: meat is unhealthy, but now there's this vegetable-based "meat" that's better, tastes just as good and as a bonus it's saving the planet etc.

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

#390

Post by Pfhreak » Fri, May 07, 2021, 6:27 AM UTC

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…

Health is not the reason these products exist. I buy them because I want an unhealthy treat that doesn't have the same ecological or animal rights impacts as beef.

If 10% of whopper sales switch to impossible whoppers, that's a big deal, and foods like this can provide a bridge to consumers who have never considered vegetarianism.

I do buy or grow local food, I'm a vegetarian myself. Your view is, in my opinion, too black and white. There's serious momentum around plant based meals, and that's making even more plant based foods available elsewhere.