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

On ‘Plant-Based’

aliciakennedy.news

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 210 posts

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#31

Post by edent »

dmitriid wrote: post #22
edent wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do meat eaters disguise things as burgers, sausages, and nuggets?

They don't "disguise" things as burgers, sausages etc. That's how meat has been prepared since time immemorial across all cultures. Why do vegans and vegetarians insist on disguising vegetables as meat - now that's the question. Even though the same cultures have a mind-boggling variety of foods that don't involve meat, and don't pretend to be meat.

What part of the mighty buffalo is the wing?

As to why vegans do it - hotdog buns are really well designed for holding a tube of protein.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#32

Post by Accacin »

namdnay wrote: post #3
hobbitstan wrote: post #2

‘Plant based’ initially meant vegan, but vegan is a dirty word for some people, likely because a lot of the early vegan meat alternatives were ghastly. As a vegan, I see a lot of labels boasting ‘plant-based’ but no mention of it being vegan or not, often not even on their website. That alone means I will not purchase. It’s either not vegan OR they’re scared to put that 5 letter word on their product. Market it as pl…

I personally like the “plant based” term, because for me “vegan” was always defined as a negative (vegans dont eat this and dont eat that), whereas plant-based just means what it says. In my experience in shops in the UK at least, there will always be a little “vegan” logo stuck on the packet as well

I'm in the UK too, and find the plant-based phrase generally useful. For example, some double cream said 'plant-based' alternative and also had the Vegan logo.

I've never really thought about it, but I assumed 'plant-based' was for products like cream that would have dairy and non-dairy alternative.

Saying 'vegan' might imply it's only for vegans where plant based just means 'non-dairy' and might be billed as more inclusive.

I'm not too concerned about it also possibly including eggs, as I always check for vegan icon or read ingredients.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#33

Post by edent »

OJFord wrote: post #27
edent wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do meat eaters disguise things as burgers, sausages, and nuggets?

That's not the same at all, 'beef burger' tells me what it is; 'vegan burger' (worse: 'vegan chicken nugget'!) only tells me what it isn't.

Ah, yes. The hamburger with no ham. The hotdog bereft of canine meat. Catsup with no kitty (OK, that one is a stretch!)

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#34

Post by scaredginger »

dataflow wrote: post #25
scaredginger wrote: post #12

I think it's a shame that 'vegetarian' has come to mean 'lacto-ovo vegetarian' in the vernacular. Now, 'plant-based' generally takes the position in language that 'vegetarian' should occupy. To be clear, there is also a distinction between 'plant-based' and 'vegan' in that the latter has ethical implications. If making a product caused animal suffering, but that product wasn't made from any animal products, then I'd…

I don't believe vegan has any ethical implications on its own? Especially given "ethical vegan" is a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism

Wikipedia is wrong here.

> Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.

https://www.vegansociety.com/about-us/further-information/ke...

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#35

Post by kazinator »

> Same with “plant-based cookie”—does that mean no animal butter, but yes to eggs?

An egg isn't the fruit of a plant; of course it's not plant-based if it contains eggs.

Everyone should be irked, regardless of their political alignment in the area of food, if they are told that something with eggs is plant-based. It is a mistake or misrepresentation.

Plant-based can only possibly mean that it's made from leaves, stalks, fruits, nuts, seeds, bark, roots or any other part of a plant.

If it contains mushrooms, yeasts or fungi, it's not plant-based; those are not plants. However, I would be generous in that if some plant comes with certain naturally occurring bacteria or fungi, then something made with that plant can still be plant-based. If the plant material is fermented, confirming bacteria or moulds, let's say it can be plant-based anyway. Insects have to be removed, though.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#36

Post by OJFord »

bin_bash wrote: post #8

I think "plant-based" is a better term than "vegan". "Vegan" describes a person or food. "Plant-based" can only describe the food—you wouldn't say "Bob is plant-based", you'd say "Bob eats plant-based food." If you order "vegan buffalo wings" you're attaching yourself to the vegan subculture and the baggage that comes along with that. Ordering "plant-based buffalo wings" just means you're ordering cauliflower.

I don't think it's any better, just makes it sound overly 'processed' when it doesn't say what it is, only what it's intended to be like but it isn't.

'Fried jackfruit with sticky barbecue sauce' might be nice; 'plant-based buffalo wings' is completely unappetising.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#37

Post by onion2k »

captainmuon wrote: post #26
scaredginger wrote: post #12

I think it's a shame that 'vegetarian' has come to mean 'lacto-ovo vegetarian' in the vernacular. Now, 'plant-based' generally takes the position in language that 'vegetarian' should occupy. To be clear, there is also a distinction between 'plant-based' and 'vegan' in that the latter has ethical implications. If making a product caused animal suffering, but that product wasn't made from any animal products, then I'd…

There is another distinction: Vegan is like kosher. It is for people who "can't" eat meat. I feel funny if I order something that is vegan or kosher because I wonder what people think about my identity. But there is no such problem if I order something that is "without meat" or "made from vegetables" or even "plant-based" (or in the case of kosher: beef or chicken instead of pork). Still, I prefer the term vegan over…

I feel funny if I order something that is vegan or kosher because I wonder what people think about my identity.

Next time you've been out at a restaurant, after you leave ask yourself if you can remember any of the other patrons and what they ordered. Unless something out of the ordinary happened the answer will be no. Everyone else is the same. No one thinks about you, judges you, or even really notices that you exist.

I don't mean that in a mean way; the simple fact is that everyone has enough going on in their life that they don't need to spend time and energy wondering about why someone else ordered the vegan option.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#38

Post by pcthrowaway »

dataflow wrote: post #25
scaredginger wrote: post #12

I think it's a shame that 'vegetarian' has come to mean 'lacto-ovo vegetarian' in the vernacular. Now, 'plant-based' generally takes the position in language that 'vegetarian' should occupy. To be clear, there is also a distinction between 'plant-based' and 'vegan' in that the latter has ethical implications. If making a product caused animal suffering, but that product wasn't made from any animal products, then I'd…

I don't believe vegan has any ethical implications on its own? Especially given "ethical vegan" is a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism

I agree with the sibling comment; You just opened a big can of (gelatin-free, gummy) worms.

Vegan absolutely refers to an ethical stance. One of the reasons plant-based is useful to distinguish from vegan when applied to people and their diets is that plant-based people may be doing it for health or religion or trendiness. Vegans are doing it for the animals (while health, the environment, religion, etc. may also play roles).

Someone who is vegan won't purchase animal products. Consumption is besides the point, though technically it means they don't consume animal products also. Some people consume animal products if they don't purchase them, for example, if they dumpster dived or took home food a buffet was about to toss. This is sometimes called "freeganism" (which is also used to mean other things), and references that it's likely more ethical to consume food that would otherwise be wasted (even if it would include animal products) than to purchase food, because it has environmental implications

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#39

Post by ricardobayes »

riffraff wrote: post #10
bin_bash wrote: post #8

I think "plant-based" is a better term than "vegan". "Vegan" describes a person or food. "Plant-based" can only describe the food—you wouldn't say "Bob is plant-based", you'd say "Bob eats plant-based food." If you order "vegan buffalo wings" you're attaching yourself to the vegan subculture and the baggage that comes along with that. Ordering "plant-based buffalo wings" just means you're ordering cauliflower.

But why doesn't the menu say "cauliflower wings" with some "V" icon or leaf icon next to it? I will never understand why parts of the vegan movement need to disguise foods as something else. Vegetables are good!

Then you don't understand how food shapes society.

Re: On ‘Plant-Based’

#40

Post by onion2k »

namdnay wrote: post #16
scaredginger wrote: post #12

I think it's a shame that 'vegetarian' has come to mean 'lacto-ovo vegetarian' in the vernacular. Now, 'plant-based' generally takes the position in language that 'vegetarian' should occupy. To be clear, there is also a distinction between 'plant-based' and 'vegan' in that the latter has ethical implications. If making a product caused animal suffering, but that product wasn't made from any animal products, then I'd…

So a tomato picked by a trained monkey would be plant-based but not vegan? What about canned tomatoes picked by quasi-slaves on some mafia farm in calabria? Would they not be vegan then?

If you're OK with eating food picked by slaves, quasi- or otherwise, then you have more to think about than veganism.
Post reply on HN