The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years • Hacker News Board

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#81

Post by BiteCode_dev » Sun, Apr 17, 2022, 9:03 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #77

MathCodeLove wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you trying to say here? That nutrition doesn't exist? It's anti-science to state that an apple has more nutritional value than a potato chip? Specifically what the parent is referencing is the density of nutrients per unit of meat. Are you saying that all meat is uniform in nutrient density? I'm genuinely flabbergasted by your supremely odd take on this situation.

What “nutrients” are you talking about? Vague unspecific references to “nutrients” is a red flag that you’re talking to an anti-vax type.

Vague unspecific references to anti-vaxing are to me a red-flag that somebody tries to win a debate without having to provide any argument for ones opinion, even when answered approprietly in another comment.

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#82

Post by blindmute » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 1:01 AM UTC

parineum wrote: post #20

kaycebasques wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is this a bad thing? Thread argues that modern chicken is less tasty: > Modern chicken is notorious for being "dry, "bland," and "flavorless." Contrast this to the 1960s, where chicken was considered a delicacy. "Chicken should be so good in itself that it is an absolute delight to eat as a perfectly plain, butter roast, saute or grill." Thread also argues that fat profile is out-of-whack due to modern chickens bei…

It's not that I find these arguments false or anything like that but I always notice a seeming lack of awareness that the extra food produced by these chickens or gmo corn or whatever actually saves lives. Complaining about taste and fat content is a luxury not everyone can afford and I think a lot of the "natural" foods type of people take that for granted.

It doesn't save lives, it just allows more breeding. As long as the population is growing, we are in a food surplus. More expensive food would just result in people having ~2 kids instead of 3, and the excess famine would resolve itself quickly and return to equilibrium. Likewise, if all food suddenly became half as expensive today, the only thing that would happen is that people would have more children until the food is back to "saving lives".

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#83

Post by blindmute » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 1:05 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #49

hackernewds wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

one could also eat less and receive the same nutritional benefits. today's giant chickens do not seem to be nutritionally dense, flavorful and the unnatural steroids and estrogen levels are certainly worse consumed, than not

Today's chickens have more muscle mass. They are bred for this trait. Are you arguing this larger muscle isn't made of protein? What is it made out of then? Are you arguing these chickens somehow survive without the nutrients that others chickens need to live? How is that possible? Those are some pretty tall claims you need to back up.

Are you implying that malnutrition or a nutrient deficiency results in immediate death? Death quicker than the 50 days it takes to butcher the chicken?

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#84

Post by blindmute » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 1:15 AM UTC

It's surprising that there doesn't seem to be supply meeting the demand for flavorful and nutritious food, or any attempt to manufacture demand. Organic food is similar, but not really the same thing, because organic generally has no discernible differences. For anyone who has been exposed to natural produce and meat, it's obvious that the grocery store varieties are inferior, yet unlike most goods, there are no companies exploiting this luxury market. Instead, you have to go to a farmer's market to get the quality goods. It's very unusual to have to go to a rural/amateur source for quality; more often, the big players in a product space have the quality and are expensive, while the amateurs are cheaper and worse.

I find it really hard to believe that there is no market for things like goat milk, goat ice cream, traditional meat breeds, even a good tomato? Everyone is aware that grocery store tomatoes are horrid, but somehow no stores stock some good cultivars alongside at double the price? How can this be an efficient market?

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#85

Post by refurb » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 5:00 AM UTC

blindmute wrote: post #83

refurb wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today's chickens have more muscle mass. They are bred for this trait. Are you arguing this larger muscle isn't made of protein? What is it made out of then? Are you arguing these chickens somehow survive without the nutrients that others chickens need to live? How is that possible? Those are some pretty tall claims you need to back up.

Are you implying that malnutrition or a nutrient deficiency results in immediate death? Death quicker than the 50 days it takes to butcher the chicken?

Are you implying farmers raise these fast-growing, extra-large birds through "malnutrition and nutrient deficiency"?

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#86

Post by steve_adams_86 » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 5:38 AM UTC

Hammershaft wrote: post #79

fayten wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I am aware the water content reducing flavor is a myth. For fruits and vegtables it comes down to ripening and temperature control. The majority of fruit we purchase from the super market is picked far before it's rip and is either sitting in storage/transport long enough to get acceptable flavor, gassed with certain hormones to speed up rippening before final arrival, or just straight up dyed. Oranges from…

I wonder why companies don't sell smaller quantities of pricier variants of fully ripened fruit then.

Well, I know in my own garden that fully ripened food doesn’t last long even with only a 20 meter trip to my refrigerator. It’s so delicate and tends to be prime for breaking and/or decaying.

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#87

Post by steve_adams_86 » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 5:51 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #77

MathCodeLove wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you trying to say here? That nutrition doesn't exist? It's anti-science to state that an apple has more nutritional value than a potato chip? Specifically what the parent is referencing is the density of nutrients per unit of meat. Are you saying that all meat is uniform in nutrient density? I'm genuinely flabbergasted by your supremely odd take on this situation.

What “nutrients” are you talking about? Vague unspecific references to “nutrients” is a red flag that you’re talking to an anti-vax type.

Wanting more information about nutrition is not comparable to being opposed to vaccines.

Nutrition is an area of study which lacks a lot of information. Even as time goes on and agriculture changes, the data we have about the food we consume appears to be out of date. There are many other factors we’re just beginning to become aware of with implications we haven’t begun to unravel.

Nutritional science and the data we have today is completely acceptable to question. Just about everything is, but nutrition seems especially open.

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#88

Post by alexshendi » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 7:44 AM UTC

I say, if someone eats a chicken for at least 50 years, small wonder that it has increased 364% in size in the meantime.

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#89

Post by blindmute » Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 8:22 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #85

blindmute wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you implying that malnutrition or a nutrient deficiency results in immediate death? Death quicker than the 50 days it takes to butcher the chicken?

Are you implying farmers raise these fast-growing, extra-large birds through "malnutrition and nutrient deficiency" ?

Yes, I am. Because I am active in the weightlifting community, I'm aware that muscle size has absolutely no correlation with nutrition or micronutrients beyond protein intake. This is extremely obvious if you ever took steroids, because you can become huge eating McDonald's and instant noodle, but even without them the same effect is observed.

Re: The chicken you are eating has increased 364% in size over the last 50 years

#90

Post by refurb » Tue, Apr 19, 2022, 3:08 AM UTC

blindmute wrote: post #89

refurb wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you implying farmers raise these fast-growing, extra-large birds through "malnutrition and nutrient deficiency" ?

Yes, I am. Because I am active in the weightlifting community, I'm aware that muscle size has absolutely no correlation with nutrition or micronutrients beyond protein intake. This is extremely obvious if you ever took steroids, because you can become huge eating McDonald's and instant noodle, but even without them the same effect is observed.

So you're saying it's possible to gain massive muscle mass while being, to quote you - "malnourished and having nutrient deficiencies"?