Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop • Hacker News Board

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#691

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:36 PM UTC

COGlory wrote: post #506

kup0 wrote: post #481

This editorialized link title and the article's headline itself doesn't really match the article's content (as is increasingly common it seems). Sure, Beyond Meat has had lower sales- but soon after they mention that retail sales of Impossible meat products increased 50% in 2022- with an odd "but the CEO left so they're in trouble" assessment which seems a bit bonkers. Then the author seems to say that because fake m…

The fundamental problem is that everyone has a different reason for wanting plant-based meat/fake meat. So by any particular metric, they have failed. Some people want fake meat to be a 1:1 meat substitute because they love meat but can't eat it (allergies, cardiovascular, etc). Some people want cheaper meat because quality meat you can trust has grown too expensive. Some people want more vegan/vegetarian options bec…

> The problem is, those looking for meat substitute think it isn't close enough, those who want cheaper meat think it's too expensive, vegans/vegetarians have actually vegetable based options and aren't necessarily looking for fake meat at all

I think of this stuff as none of these things. It's nicotine gum.

Nicotine gum won't ever replace cigarettes, nor will people who don't smoke start chewing it.

This is a product for people trying to transition away from a meat-heavy diet. It's never going to be 100% the same, but it's close enough to reduce the cravings. Eventually they'll graduate to healthier, cheaper, and (arguably) better tasting vegetarian products that don't resemble meat at all.

The motivations for cutting back on meat don't matter. Just like there's a market for nicotine gum, there's a market for this.

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#692

Post by belorn » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:38 PM UTC

j-pb wrote: post #187

xdennis wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meat was a luxury product not eaten every day for most of history And nobody want's to return to those dark ages. This devil's alliance between veganism and environmentalism is what put me off environmentalism. Climate change can be softened by banning airplanes, air conditioning, and other things we don't need, not by banning food.

If you care about environmentalism then you should resonate with the fact that 68% of the Amazon is Burnt for pastures for Cattle Farming. 28% is Burnt for Agriculture, of which 60% is for soybeans, of which 77% are shipped overseas for livestock feed. That means at least 80% is burned for livestock or livestock feed. Since part of the palm oil and other plant produced is also used for livestock feed that number prob…

If meat is causing people to burn down the amazon, then don't eat meat produced from the Amazon. There is a reason why for example here in Sweden the price of imported beef from Brazil tend to be about half the price of locally produced beef. Local producers has to follow regulations and laws that Brazil producers do not.

I will generally advise that people avoid buying any products from countries who has a history of burning rain forests to produce (or we can call it subsidize) cheap exports. Similar for cheap products created from child labors, military conflicts, sweatshops, or forced labor camps.

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#693

Post by mrguyorama » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:40 PM UTC

Moldoteck wrote: post #515

serial_dev wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was a vegetarian for years, and I totally agree. People always recommended me these awful veggie/vegan alternatives to meat, and they were all disgusting. Fake bacon, fake meat, fake sausage, fake ham, baloney, all ended up being stomach turning. Interestingly, only people who recommended me these still ate meat, never vegetarians. The thing is that there are many alternatives (falafel, all kinds of different chees…

oh god, i adore falafel. I found some frozen falafel made in my town that didn't have additives at all and it was just .... I can finish a 400g package at once))

I don't get falafel. Chickpea tastes like sand. It always seemed to me like the kind of food you create when you don't have an alternative source of basic plant bulk for certain foods, like cornmeal or wheat flour or soybean.

Why not fill tofu with the same spices and deep fry that? To my palate that would be strictly better. Or alternatively like a hashbrown sandwich with indian spices in the hash brown seems like it would create the same result without leaving you with a mouthful of sand. Of course, I'm about as white man as you get so...

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#694

Post by vineyardmike » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:45 PM UTC

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #691

COGlory wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fundamental problem is that everyone has a different reason for wanting plant-based meat/fake meat. So by any particular metric, they have failed. Some people want fake meat to be a 1:1 meat substitute because they love meat but can't eat it (allergies, cardiovascular, etc). Some people want cheaper meat because quality meat you can trust has grown too expensive. Some people want more vegan/vegetarian options bec…

> The problem is, those looking for meat substitute think it isn't close enough, those who want cheaper meat think it's too expensive, vegans/vegetarians have actually vegetable based options and aren't necessarily looking for fake meat at all I think of this stuff as none of these things. It's nicotine gum. Nicotine gum won't ever replace cigarettes, nor will people who don't smoke start chewing it. This is a produc…

To add: it’s additionally a cop-out to restaurants providing a vegetarian option.

Eg. Burger joints without veg options are losing sales when a group including a vegetarian slips the meal instead of getting an impossible burger.

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#695

Post by slothtrop » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:45 PM UTC

someNameIG wrote: post #678

slothtrop wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's as meaningful as saying you can't gauge whether plants suffer or not - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wound_response_in_plants#MAMPs... I think we can get a pretty good ballpark estimate, by virtue that suffering categorically requires a certain level consciousness.

Plants have no brains or analog at all, plats reacting and signalling is no different than a bacteria moving along a concentration gradient. The animals I mentioned do, even if very simple ones. If you really want to question this bivalves are a better example, as I've seen many debates in vegan circles about them.

> plats reacting and signalling is no different than a bacteria moving along a concentration gradient.

No different than pain receptors, you mean.

> Plants have no brains or analog at all

No brain, yes. But what of "no analog" if the qualifier for suffering is deliberately clouded in ambiguity?

The only reason the brain matters qua suffering is owing to the capacity for consciousness. Plants have no brain, well, sardines have no cerebral cortex.

If you're going to trivialize the cerebral cortex based on whim/feeling, you can do the same for the whole brain. By extension it makes as much sense to attribute the possibility of consciousness to insects as it does to plants, because you're throwing the particulars of the brain out the window. Some "magical unknown thing 'X'" is giving them consciousness - but there's no reason "magical unknown thing 'X'" has to be specific to a brain.

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#696

Post by comte7092 » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:48 PM UTC

unity1001 wrote: post #682

comte7092 wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They live there from birth to death. Citation needed, no where in your source does it substantiate your claim that cows are reared on factory farms, where they subsequently live out their lives. > You actually did. You said in repeated comments to me and others that in the west the cows consume grass. Because they do feed on grass . Look I get it, you clearly care about animal welfare, which is a good thing, but I…

> Citation needed, no where in your source Factory farming is the same everywhere. Here's another citation. https://www.aspca.org/protecting-farm-animals/problem-factor... . Another. https://thehumaneleague.org/article/what-is-factory-farming Another. https://sentientmedia.org/factory-farms/ Another extensive one with more references inside. https://animalequality.org/blog/2022/10/14/factory-farming-f... > Because th…

Not a single one do your sources refutes anything that I said. Or supports your claim that cows spend their whole lives on factory farms. All they say is that they exist and that most animals go through them. Newsflash! That’s what I have been saying all along.

> Even if the cattle was 'first grass fed then shipped to factory farms to fatten' like you argue, the factory farming consuming ~70% of the grain in the US at that point would STILL make my argument. That's bad. That's inefficient. There is no defending it, even if your argument was true.

You’re arguing against a point I never made! I never said factory farms didn’t exist, that they were good, or that the system itself is good! You’re fighting for the sake of fighting.

All I said is that it is true that cows start off on grass. That’s the beginning and end of my point. It’s a factual statement and you do yourself a disservice by continually arguing against basic factual information.

Factory farms (for meat) don’t rear animals. They buy animals from other ranches that oversee other parts of the process of raising cattle. They then take those cows and feed them a mountain of grain to fatten them up and slaughter them. It’s gross, it’s terrible for the cows welfare, etc.

If you want to criticize the system, though, it is important to understand how it actually works, or you don’t look credible. That is my point, it is incredibly frustrating to be told over and over that I support factory farming, or somehow deny its existence, because I am pointing out information that is false on your part.

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#697

Post by nightski » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:50 PM UTC

jknoepfler wrote: post #608

nightski wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that's not true. Most cattle is grass fed for the majority of it's life at which point they will have them eat at feed lots to fatten up. Second, feed lots can use things like by-products of sugar production (molasses, beet pulp pellets, etc...) for feed. These are not human consumable and require no extra food to be grown. I've worked with a company that does over half a billion in revenue on this alone. There…

Now account for the energy, land, labor, materials, and environmental externalities required to bring a cow from birth to the table at industrial scale (all the way from birth, through the animal's ~1.5 years of life (?), through slaughter, butchering, packing, distribution to the consumer, etc.), and compare that to a proportionate amount of beans and rice.

1. Energy - The renewable folks would have us believe this is incredibly cheap 2. Land - Most of this land is not usable for other purposes. At least in the U.S. I am not speaking about globally because the problems there are largely political 3. Labor - Creating jobs and opportunities is not a bad thing 4. Environmental - With the wars going on I think we have a lot more to worry about than the 3% of emissions coming from animal husbandry in the U.S. Other than climate change impacts (which could be minimized even further with feed supplements), animal husbandry is actually beneficial to the environment.

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#698

Post by stcroixx » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:53 PM UTC

lukeschlather wrote: post #671

stcroixx wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was very trendy in certain circles when I was in college to be vegetarian/vegan and I think it was mostly a fashion choice. If it had been about morals, there would have been other lifestyle changes.

People also adopt religions to be fashionable, and they don't follow all the tenets of that religion. Seems bad-faith to ask someone who professes a moral stance why they don't behave more like someone who is just professing that moral stance to be fashionable.

Who is asking that?

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#699

Post by philwelch » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:53 PM UTC

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #691

COGlory wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fundamental problem is that everyone has a different reason for wanting plant-based meat/fake meat. So by any particular metric, they have failed. Some people want fake meat to be a 1:1 meat substitute because they love meat but can't eat it (allergies, cardiovascular, etc). Some people want cheaper meat because quality meat you can trust has grown too expensive. Some people want more vegan/vegetarian options bec…

> The problem is, those looking for meat substitute think it isn't close enough, those who want cheaper meat think it's too expensive, vegans/vegetarians have actually vegetable based options and aren't necessarily looking for fake meat at all I think of this stuff as none of these things. It's nicotine gum. Nicotine gum won't ever replace cigarettes, nor will people who don't smoke start chewing it. This is a produc…

Actually, a lot of non-smokers use nicotine products; aside from caffeine it’s one of the few commercially available CNS stimulants out there.

Re: Plant-based meat is turning out to be a flop

#700

Post by jandrewrogers » Thu, Jan 19, 2023, 6:58 PM UTC

unity1001 wrote: post #682

comte7092 wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They live there from birth to death. Citation needed, no where in your source does it substantiate your claim that cows are reared on factory farms, where they subsequently live out their lives. > You actually did. You said in repeated comments to me and others that in the west the cows consume grass. Because they do feed on grass . Look I get it, you clearly care about animal welfare, which is a good thing, but I…

> Citation needed, no where in your source Factory farming is the same everywhere. Here's another citation. https://www.aspca.org/protecting-farm-animals/problem-factor... . Another. https://thehumaneleague.org/article/what-is-factory-farming Another. https://sentientmedia.org/factory-farms/ Another extensive one with more references inside. https://animalequality.org/blog/2022/10/14/factory-farming-f... > Because th…

As someone who has first-hand knowledge of cattle farming in the "Angloamerican West", I can confirm that the OP is correct. A substantial portion of the US beef herd is raised on grass and finished on grain as described. Anyone can see this with their own eyes in many rural areas, internet links from activist groups don't erase that reality.

Raising on grass and finishing on grain is economically optimal in many parts of the US that produce beef. It wouldn't even make sense to factory farm from birth if you cared about profit, since it would be more expensive.

The US is a large place with diverse geography. Few assertions about agriculture generalize.