Live data from Hacker News

Is algae the new kale?

nationalgeographic.com

91–100 of 320 posts

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#91
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't feed cows corn, feed cows grass.

Depends what you want to do with the meat. Corn fed beef is superior for certain applications like BBQ.

Corn-fed beef is bland and greasy. Next you'll be telling me that Aberdeen-Angus beef is good...

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#92
As soon as someone says X tastes like Y I get a little suspicious. Can't we just come up with a new notion of X unto itself so we all don't have to pretend that X tastes like Y?

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#93

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.

Completely valid, I worried about that after I typed it but decided to leave it in to relate more to the article which opens on a wacky start up idea.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#94
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beans + rice is easily the most common meal on the planet, as the cheapest complete protein source around. We live in a bubble, never mind saving the planet

A quick Google search reveals that beans are not a complete , since they lack several essential amino acids. Edit: correction, it appears that soybeans are the exception. But when one thinks of having a serving of "beans and rice", soybeans are unlikely to be the bean served.

Pinto beans and rice are complete, for example. The amino acid deficiencies are complementary.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#95

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…

>because beans and rice are healthy

I disagree. A high carb diet make me fat. A high protein diets does not.

There is no vegan way for me to eat my daily protein target without eating far too many carbs along with it.

(edit: I should have stated that there is no way beyond eating highly processed foods)

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#96
I love the seaweed that you sometimes get in restaurants (rarely where I live, unfortunately). But the article makes me a bit skeptical, it doesn't mention any downsides at all, it sounds more like a marketing piece than a balanced assessment.

I don't even know what questions I'd have to ask, off the top of my head I'd like to know what the risks regarding eg mercury and microplastics contamination are. Also, would we be eating 'wild' algae, or would they be farmed? I guess it'd have quite different implications both ecologically as well as nutrient-wise.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#97
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?

My guess is that recently lots of people have come to associate hunger with their own failed attempts at losing weight rather than with poverty and desperation. Saying that you want to "end hunger" is not a message that will resonate with them.

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#98

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.

> doesn't eat that much meat, India being my go to example

Indian/Pakistani food may be vegetarian but it tastes good because of animal products like eggs, butter, cream, milk, and cheese.

It's vegetarian but not vegan.

Source: I grew up eating this type of food daily

Re: Is algae the new kale?

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. No, we don't hear about it more because it's not healthful. If it were, the human digestive system would be like that of cattle, but it's not. You can feed everyone carby, fibrous meals, but that's not optimal and not even necessarily better for the environment. The reason…

Lentils and rice are a complete protein. While they don't provide 100% of the nutrients you need, if you throw in a few green vegetables you'll be absolutely fine. Crops use something like 1% of the resources to grow that meat does. It's not just about where carbon is stored, but land and water usage and where carbon is produced (cows fart. a lot.). Overall plant-based diets are far superior for the planet than meat-…

There is token research that creatine supplements are especially beneficial for vegans, and creatine isn't the only thing mostly found in animal-based foods. Given nutritional sciences has a history of being a rollercoaster ride, maybe it isn't the best idea to make wild claims which don't mirror how the world behaves at large.

Water and land usage is also A: grossly overstated (you can't grow anything except grass on most land) and B: cited as something against all meat when chickens, goats, ducks, geese and pigs use far less of both. At that point, substantiate or correct your statement to 'beef'.

Post reply on HN