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

691–700 of 794 posts

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

#691

Post by eloff »

XorNot wrote: post #321
eloff wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. When I was about fifteen it occurred to me that while that's true, those animals wouldn't be alive at all without us raising them for food. So it seems to me that the goal should be raisin…

Mass scale pain and torture of food animals, the extraordinarily high rates of psychological injury which slaughterhouse workers experience... Most vegetarianism is not about that animals are killed, it is a protest against the way in which the entire industry functions.

I hope this will get better, I would (and do when possible) pay more for free range, ethically raised meat products. I imagine producers will follow the money if enough people think that way.

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

#692

Post by vel0city »

claudiawerner wrote: post #234
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…

>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. I'm going to be as neutral as I can be in this comment. I don't think that's something that should stand in the way; it depends if we're coming from a philosophical perspective, or a political perspective. Arguably, some harms should not be tolerated in civil society - and I think t…

> How did the population in general become acclimatised to other things we now see as immoral[0]?

Pretty much all of our examples in that list of things have direct human victims. Its far easier to get people to realize things are immoral when there are direct human victims. Eating meat usually doesn't have direct human victims, so it is harder to get most people to agree its immoral.

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

#693

Post by uxcolumbo »

tsimionescu wrote: post #659
uxcolumbo wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lion needs to kill to survive. We in the modern world don't need to kill anymore to survive. We have the choice, so why choose to kill an animal just for culinary pleasures?

So your proposed alternative is we keep raising these animals, but euthanize them when they get to some age / fall sick?

No, the alternative is to not to keep breeding farm animals in the billions, which is a major cause for natural habitat loss [0].

Instead have more R&D into creating meat like substances that doesn't require to kill an animal and doesn't require such a huge carbon footprint - and we are getting there slowly.

And that's the mission of Ethan Brown (Beyond Meat founder) - he said you won't be able to change the culture of meat eating, but if you offer people something that's as good or better and cheaper then people will switch.

Again, the main question really is why inflict pain and kill an animal if you don't need to?

We are not hunter gatherers anymore.

The above comment excludes people who still need to eat meat to survive.

----

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUMGBwgGYWw&t=100s

https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/natur...

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

#694

Post by arunix »

igetspam wrote: post #681
shlant wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

animals do not have a concept of good and evil so why would we apply it to them? I think looking at how things in the animal kingdom work and using that as a justification for our actions is a very low bar. We have the cognitive and emotional ability to understand that things like murder/rape/etc. are wrong do we not? If you just take a small step from that and recognize the sentience of animals, it doesn't seem too…

They don't have words for it but if you've met shelter dogs or animals that have suffered abuse, they definitely understand the concept of evil. I have a rescue pig that I adore but he doesn't trust men because he lived a life of abuse. I can only assume that he sees men as evil, even if he can't make that statement. Some things are just natural. Humans seem to think we have a superior understanding of all things but…

Your example of evil just seems like the animals having a sense of danger to me. Animals usually instinctively will try to avoid danger. This doesn't require them to have a concept of evil.

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

#695

Post by lambdaba »

knuthsat wrote: post #647
lambdaba wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a riddle for you: if seed oils were not toxic, why are mice given seed oils as low as 4-5% of calories in order to cause cancer in the presence of other carcinogens? They don't get cancer with the carcinogens alone, they have to add the seed oils to trigger the cancers.

There are similar studies on meat/Neu5Gc being combined with fibre to reduce the toxicity - more carcinogens present the less fibre there is. There are similar studies on casein/whey. These studies do not make meat, milk, cheese or seed oils inherently unhealthy or show that you can't have them as a part of a healthy diet. edit: doing a quick Google Scholar search I can find a bunch of studies that show positive outc…

Flax has alpha linolenic acid, which in some people (I am one of them) can't efficiently be converted into omega-3

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

#696

Post by jlebar »

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…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

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

#697

Post by spenczar5 »

SamBam wrote: post #201
spenczar5 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that calculation work? Prairies were inhabited by huge herds of large grazers: bison. Thats how they stayed as prairies. There were about 60 million bison on the American prairie before 1800. There are about 90 million cattle in the US across all states - with large numbers outside the bison’s range, in states like New York and Tennessee and California. So - roughly in the same ballpark. Pasture-raised cattl…

Part of the issue is also that there is simply far less grassland now. The prairies and other grasslands used to be huge , and supported 2/3rds of the number of bovines. Now they're a tiny fraction of the size and supporting 50% more.

Pastureland makes up 27% of the US; crop land is 18% [1]. What do you mean by "tiny fraction?" Is pastureland different than grassland?

[1] USDA National Resource Conservation Service "Range and Pastureland" https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/la...

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

#698

Post by knuthsat »

lambdaba wrote: post #639
knuthsat wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cyanide in apple seeds is toxic in proper amounts, should I avoid consuming apple seeds, or apples completely? Toxicity of certain compounds in meat or other foods has nothing to do with the food itself being healthy or unhealthy. Similarly how antioxidant, vitamin or macronutrient content has nothing to do with that particular food being healthy or unhealthy. Promoting the idea that a particular food or ingredient i…

Here's a riddle for you: if seed oils were not toxic, why are mice given seed oils as low as 4-5% of calories in order to cause cancer in the presence of other carcinogens? They don't get cancer with the carcinogens alone, they have to add the seed oils to trigger the cancers.

20g of flaxseed oil (180kcal) contains a bunch of ALA, pick a massively low conversion ration to DHA/EPA of 0.5% or 1% or whatever, and you'll see that you'll get very near if not over the recommended daily amounts of 250-750mg.

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

#699

Post by dunefox »

scotty79 wrote: post #687
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 don't get why exact taste of burgers is so important to some people. I can stomach burgers from McDonald's if I haven't eaten them in few months. But if I eat them more than one or two times a week they very quickly start to taste like the garbage they are. It's really dreadful form of food and I was assuming people eat it as last resort when they are really hungry. Not that they indulge in them because the specifi…

It's almost as if burgers from McDonalds and good burgers are completely different things.

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

#700

Post by dunefox »

Thorentis wrote: post #612
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…

Where do you draw the line between animals and plants? Plants are a form of life. Is it the pain? What is it about animal pain that is morally objectionable? Because humans can feel pain too, therefore animal pain is also bad? Assuming we grant that, what if animals were put to sleep before being killed? Does that then make it okay? I find the whole "violence against animals" argument to be incredibly hand-wavy and w…

> Where do you draw the line between animals and plants?

Exactly there: between animals and plants.

Post reply on HN