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

661–670 of 794 posts

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

#661

Post by tootie »

himinlomax wrote: post #470
tootie wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All food is processed. Cows are genetically engineered. There's no reason to be afraid of simple chemistry. Cranks like Michael Polian have made a fortune selling FUD with no science. Just read a label. Boxed food with a ton of salt and sugar is probably not good for you whether it's corn syrup or agave nectar. Similarly, boxed fiber and protein is perfectly fine. Buying locally is not scalable and fails to take adva…

> Cows are genetically engineered That's not what processed food means. A slice of steak from a GMO cow is not processed food, except inasmuch as slashing a knife is a process. Furthermore, more or less traditional cheese is not considered "processed food" in that context even though it is definitely processed for a long time and with significant effort. Nor is wine or sauerkraut for that matter.

Yeah "not considered" processed because it's what people are used to, not because it's safe or natural. Livestock have been genetically engineered via selective breeding for millenia before we knew what DNA was. Unless we have reason to believe that mixing pea protein and heme in sterile vat is actually more dangerous than fermentation, it's FUD. Grilling meat can release carcinogens (https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/d...).

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

#662

Post by JohnPrine »

purephase wrote: post #243
wyager wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The methane output issue is also pretty much total BS. First off, there used to be over 60 million buffalo in North America, producing similar amounts of methane. We have only 50% more cows today. Second, whatever cows don't eat is probably going to be metabolized by fungi, which also produce methane (although it's not well-quantified how much). Third, the half-life of atmospheric methane is only on the order of 9 ye…

There's a lot of literal bullshit to dispel here. First, the whole bison vs. cow argument is bunk for a variety of reasons. The diet that roaming bison ate is very different that the beef and dairy cattle eat today. Also, they didn't typically shit in large pools given that they were not animals that we're penned in to the same geographical location and roamed, often over many, many miles throughout the year. Second,…

What's unhealthy about GMO corn?

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

#663

Post by ajdegol »

lambdaba wrote: post #505
ajdegol wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern humans don't go back literally millions of years. If one were to look at how humans evolved then looking at "Comparative Anatomy of Digestive System of Carnivores, Omnivores, Herbivores, and Humans" to me implies a strong bent towards fruits and nuts. Personally, I think whatever could be eaten got eaten. The consensus of the IPCC is that we should eat less meat. Food has extremely strong cultural significance…

I arrived at this conclusion both from personal experience (I've tried all the apparently reasonable diets) and the scientific data. Nuts are barely digestible. Our digestive system doesn't look like a herbivore / fruit eater at all. Surely we've had some, but that's not what we're build for. I think we're like dogs, we can survive on a diversity of foods (and get sick from some of them) but we thrive on meat. That's…

Sure hints would be good and much appreciated! When you say "our diet doesn't look like a herbivore/fruit eater at all", I see tables like this [1] and it would strongly suggest the opposite. Maybe it's propaganda... I don't know, I should like to see something like a ScienceBrief on it.

In terms of the last thing you said. You phrased it as "australopithecus ate meat"; it seems they predominantly were herbivorous according to wikipedia[2]. Which doesn't preclude eating meat, but could easily be misinterpreted from the way you put it.

[1] https://livinontheveg.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/compara... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecus#Diet

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

#664

Post by marliechiller »

tsimionescu wrote: post #566
cubesmarching wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All humans eventually die, and most natural deaths are far more horrifying than how we would be able to murder other humans, especially in modern times (though even traditional slaughter is nothing compared to dying of cancer, stroke, being murdered in a car crash, etc.) So, I think that it is important how the humans are grown (prisons are absolutely horrible, unacceptable places to live in, and should ideally becom…

This is a silly straw-man. First of all, most humans in society die relatively peaceful deaths (and this proportion would increase if we supported euthanasia, which I am in favor of in certain cases). Second of all, humans form powerful attachments to their kin and peers, and the death of a human brings great and lasting sadness to all other humans in their group. This is not something observed with cattle and most o…

|Second of all, humans form powerful attachments to their kin and peers, and the death of a human brings great and lasting sadness to all other humans in their group. This is not something observed with cattle and most other animals (though there are exceptions), except for short periods of time.

straight up false. cattle mourn death and seperation from their calves very obviously, for days. Heres just a small example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Woulyd9NWFM&list=PLtc3iQTP5E... some cursory googling will support this. Whos to say they dont carry that burden for the rest of their lives? I only show outward emotion for a brief time period after a death, but I certainly have sadness for a long time after and it would be hubris to think something as intelligent as a pig or a cow would be unnaffected enough to justify that for 5 minutes of taste

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

#665

Post by 0-_-0 »

cubesmarching wrote: post #587
tsimionescu wrote: post #566

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a silly straw-man. First of all, most humans in society die relatively peaceful deaths (and this proportion would increase if we supported euthanasia, which I am in favor of in certain cases). Second of all, humans form powerful attachments to their kin and peers, and the death of a human brings great and lasting sadness to all other humans in their group. This is not something observed with cattle and most o…

The leading causes of death are diseases, cancers, dementia, road injuries, etc. These are inarguably more "horrifying" deaths than how we could kill people with methods such as those used for euthanasia, which is the point the original comment was making. If a human has no friends, and their death would not bring great and lasting sadness to other humans, is it ok to murder them? If a human is mentally or physically…

Murdering a lonely person or a handicapped person still brings significant distress to other humans.

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

#666

Post by gibspaulding »

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…

Over the last couple of years my wife and I have been adopting what I jokingly refer to as a "local-etarian" diet. Essentially we've been paying attention more to how our food is sourced (trying to buy meat from folks like you!) rather than trying to cut out anything specific.

My take away from that experience specifically in the US is that if you want to be sustainable/humane/etc. the best effort to effectiveness ratio is probably just to be a vegetarian. Finding and vetting sources for meat in much of the US is not easy.

Most normal grocery stores simply don't stock anything resembling what you describe and even at our local Co-Op, the choices can be pretty inscrutable. Do I want the "We've ticked all the boxes to be labeled 'Organic'" or "We're Amish, so you should totally trust us" or the "We're too small to bother with fancy packaging or certifications"? It's hard to say, though generally we lean towards the last option.

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

#668

Post by sweetheart »

NicoJuicy wrote: post #532
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…

Define violence against animals please? If there wouldn't be an economic incentive to keep animals alive, their land would be reporposed to crops/housing and a lot of animals would be slaughtered pointlessly.

Very NSFW and serious trigger warning: https://youtu.be/yPQYxYt3zmI

Here is what I mean by violence against animals

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

#669

Post by sweetheart »

ur-whale wrote: post #422
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…

> No one needed to die for you to eat it. I wonder what you make of carnivorous animals (cats, lions, tigers and the like)? Should they also subscribe to your weird moral system?

When they develop advanced societies and agriculture, and dietetic institutions verify that they can live full healthy lives without meat, then yes I’ll expect them to go at least vegetarian

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

#670

Post by cubesmarching »

0-_-0 wrote: post #665
cubesmarching wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The leading causes of death are diseases, cancers, dementia, road injuries, etc. These are inarguably more "horrifying" deaths than how we could kill people with methods such as those used for euthanasia, which is the point the original comment was making. If a human has no friends, and their death would not bring great and lasting sadness to other humans, is it ok to murder them? If a human is mentally or physically…

Murdering a lonely person or a handicapped person still brings significant distress to other humans.

Murdering animals also brings significant distress to humans. Just not all humans.
Post reply on HN