Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is algae the new kale?

nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 320 posts

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#51

Post by somebody78978 »

Victerius wrote: post #22

Only if the rich do it first. I won't eat bugs, lab grown meat, algae, or any other experimental food until the rich do it first, and do it consistently, not just once as a demonstration. My logic is simple. If the rich don't embrace an innovation, it tells me that the innovation is either not what it's cracked up to be, that it gives a poorer quality product than the traditional option, or that the rich think the in…

Algae isn't an experimental food; plenty of rich people eat sushi, for example.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#52

Post by scythe »

Algae has what I sometimes call the "hempseed problem": it tastes awful. Hempseeds are highly productive, nutritious, and smash almost every other whole plant food on the crucial protein:fiber ratio, coming in at 12:1. The only problem is, you have to eat them.

Japan pretty much identified every kind of seaweed that you can eat without puking a thousand years ago and the list is not long. A tablespoon of spirulina is a great way to ruin a smoothie, never mind that it mostly comes from the disappearing Lake Chad.

So it's heavily processed, and it could certainly get into food products that way, but nobody will notice — or care — that they're eating algae-derived food products. If you doubt that, just look up where xanthan gum comes from, or consider that Aspergillus niger is the primary source of citric acid.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#53

Post by Avicebron »

marricks wrote: post #39

I love all these whacky avenues people take when eating just plants is a very low foot print option available to almost everyone. We don’t need to eat crickets, we don’t need to eat algae, we don’t need bioreactors for growing meat. I think the main reason we don’t hear more about just how goddamn efficient a bowl of lentils and rice is, or oatmeal, is because it’s not sexy. You just can’t make a start up on beans an…

Huge swathes of the human population doesn't eat that much meat, India being my go to example of delicious vegetarian food spanning a very very long time.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#54

Post by hunterb123 »

flavius29663 wrote: post #17
flareback wrote: post #5

I've seen this movie, I don't want that life

you know, some people were really squeamish about eating aquatic roaches, and they were reserved for penal colonies...but over time the public at large started to love them, they also gave them better names, like "crabs" and "lobsters".

anyone can eat algae if they want to, most don't want to.

some people do want to eat crab and lobsters, some don't.

it's not a naming issue or a perception issue, it's a choice issue.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#55

Post by pfarrell »

stevenkkim wrote: post #48
marricks wrote: post #39

I love all these whacky avenues people take when eating just plants is a very low foot print option available to almost everyone. We don’t need to eat crickets, we don’t need to eat algae, we don’t need bioreactors for growing meat. I think the main reason we don’t hear more about just how goddamn efficient a bowl of lentils and rice is, or oatmeal, is because it’s not sexy. You just can’t make a start up on beans an…

Also, can you imagine the positive impact on health and well-being? Also, my impression is that at least in the U.S. there isn't a shortage of farmable land. It's just that most of it is used to grow corn and soybeans, and most of the corn is being used to feed cattle and make ethanol. I think a lot more work needs to be done to show how tasty plant-based foods can be. Anecdote: growing up, I hated brussel sprouts b/…

In addition to changing to roasting, and depending on how old you are, brussels sprouts may have literally been different when you were a kid [0]. Dutch biologists worked to alter the sprouts we eat and have changed the bitterness. That's why they've had such a renaissance. I never had them as a kid, but I distinctly remember my brother making them at Thanksgiving around 2010 and we were shocked at how much we enjoyed them and couldn't figure out why they had such a bad reputation in pop culture.

0: https://www.mentalfloss.com/posts/do-brussels-sprouts-taste-...

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#56

Post by rr808 »

poszlem wrote: post #15

I cannot understand how it is possible that the phrases like "food security" instead of "hunger" became used widespread organically seemingly out of nowhere. Genuine question, can someone explain that to me without resorting to some sort of conspiracy theories?

Maybe the distrinction comes from the West where food charities help out with food for hunger, but they aren't in danger of starving to death like many 3rd world countries.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#57

Post by [deleted] »

tantalor wrote: post #30
poszlem wrote: post #15

I cannot understand how it is possible that the phrases like "food security" instead of "hunger" became used widespread organically seemingly out of nowhere. Genuine question, can someone explain that to me without resorting to some sort of conspiracy theories?

> became used widespread organically seemingly out of nowhere Except, it didn't? https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=... Just because you are just now noticing something common doesn't mean it recently became common.

[deleted]

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#58

Post by incone123 »

Victerius wrote: post #22

Only if the rich do it first. I won't eat bugs, lab grown meat, algae, or any other experimental food until the rich do it first, and do it consistently, not just once as a demonstration. My logic is simple. If the rich don't embrace an innovation, it tells me that the innovation is either not what it's cracked up to be, that it gives a poorer quality product than the traditional option, or that the rich think the in…

I want to agree with you, but some rich people will try (or promote) any fad. I'm thinking of Gwyneth Paltrow.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#60

Post by goodpoint »

marricks wrote: post #39

I love all these whacky avenues people take when eating just plants is a very low foot print option available to almost everyone. We don’t need to eat crickets, we don’t need to eat algae, we don’t need bioreactors for growing meat. I think the main reason we don’t hear more about just how goddamn efficient a bowl of lentils and rice is, or oatmeal, is because it’s not sexy. You just can’t make a start up on beans an…

> We don’t need to eat crickets, we don’t need to eat algae, we don’t need bioreactors for growing meat.

While this is true, algae has been a common, almost staple food for thousands of years in Asia.

TFA, "start eating algae" only betrays its narrow perspective.

Post reply on HN