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

Beyond Meat fights for survival

foodinstitute.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 645 posts

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#411

Post by harrisi »

rpdillon wrote: post #328
harrisi wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The term comes from the Nova classification. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_classification

> Ultra-processed foods are operationally distinguishable from processed foods by the presence of food substances of no culinary use (varieties of sugars such as fructose, high-fructose corn syrup, 'fruit juice concentrates', invert sugar, maltodextrin, dextrose and lactose; modified starches; modified oils such as hydrogenated or interesterified oils; and protein sources such as hydrolysed proteins, soya protein iso…

Earlier in the definition it uses the more conservative phrase "no or rare culinary use," which I think is more accurate. The point is just to attempt to categorize foods by processing levels in a way the public can understand.

I am curious what items in the list differ for you. When's the last time you grabbed your isolated fructose and maltodextrin to season your steak?

The way I think of it is if I were to cook a chicken breast or bake a loaf of bread and then write down the ingredients, they'd be chicken, oil, salt, pepper; or flour, water, yeast, salt. Now go look at the ingredients of a chicken breast (raw, marinated, or cooked) and a loaf of bread in the grocery store and note the differences between the ingredient list. If the ingredient list for an item from the store includes things a household wouldn't have at home, like fructose or maltodextrin, that item would be considered ultra processed.

I'll note that I don't eat as healthy as I should, people should do what they want, and it's possible to still be unhealthy while avoiding ultra processed foods.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#412

Post by zavec »

1024core wrote: post #401

As a vegetarian, the problem with Beyond Meat (and other such products) is that they're too close to the original. I'm a vegetarian; I don't want to eat meat. If what I'm eating tastes too close to meat, I begin doubting it. It has happened several times in the past where I've been served (real) meat when I explicitly asked for a non-meat version (e.g. "beef burrito" instead of "bean burrito", etc.) This is why I avo…

I think this will vary largely based on individual opinion. Many vegetarians will feel the same way as you of course.

I'm currently trying to minimize my meat consumption where feasible based on some other factors, for several years in the past have been a stricter vegetarian as well. My motives for that are and were entirely based on cruelty and environmental concerns, so for me (and again, I suspect many other people who are vegetarian for their own combination of reasons) being close to the real thing isn't a downside at all.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#413

Post by anon84873628 »

biztos wrote: post #397
santoshalper wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea was that Beyond Meat would be a "transitional" product that would provide an ever growing vegetarian/vegan population an option that was familiar to them. For example, if you do not care about celebrating vegetables, and just want to end animal cruelty, but you miss the taste of meat, then a beyond burger was supposed to be for you. The biggest problem they have is the exhorbinant prices, which releg…

> just want to end animal cruelty, but you miss the taste of meat Does that actually describe a commercially relevant segment of the population? Intuitively, having known a lot of vegetarians, I'd expect the people whose primary concern is animal cruelty to be specifically turned off by realistic fake meat.

Well, that's why that thesis seems to have failed. There has not been a huge cultural sea change driving meat eaters towards the products.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#414

Post by e40 »

novia wrote: post #394
novia wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked them up and I couldn't find any indication that they regularly offer vegan pizzas.

In case anyone else reads this later, i found one location that does vegan pizzas, Arizmendi Bakery (Lakeshore) They have at least six locations, and not all of them do the vegan thing

Sorry, I should have specified that. The Lakeshore one is the one I go to.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#415

Post by e40 »

novia wrote: post #263
e40 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vegan cheese is made from cashews. If you’re in the Bay Area try Arizmendi’s vegan pizza. Surprisingly good.

I looked them up and I couldn't find any indication that they regularly offer vegan pizzas.

https://arizmendilakeshore.com/menu/

Search for "vegan" ... sorry I didn't specify which location.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#416

Post by anon84873628 »

aziaziazi wrote: post #398
scythmic_waves wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for breaking that down. As someone doing weightlifting, this is the primary reason I don't bother with vegetarian meats. They actually taste pretty good IMO, but they don't offer nutritional benefits commensurate with animal meat. It's a shame, really. I'd gladly incorporate them if I could get a similar protein : calorie ratio.

Did you try Tempeh? 20gr of protein / 150cal. It looks like a steak. It's god's food: high prots, fibers, iron, vitamins, unsaturated fats. Low carbs and sodium. Super digestive. Super versatile: from burgers to bolognese to barbecue to everything, even sweety for the courageous. My easy goto is a dip of whatever open sauce I already have and 1 min micro wave heating. A bit more time ? Fried on the pan with soy sauce…

The parent said "vegetarian meats" so I hope we can assume that's not meant to include tempeh and tofu (but rather things like TVP or mycoprotein products).

And while we're on the subject, Mike Israetel from Renaissance Periodization gives soy protein high marks for body builders. Good macros, good price, and highest amino acid profile score after milk/meat/eggs. Having tofu on hand is definitely helpful during a bulk.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#417

Post by rzz3 »

npteljes wrote: post #210
libertine wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I could buy a free range, organic and grass fed beef burger for the price of their ultra processed burger. In many countries, it's a heavily subsidized industry. Even if you have VC funds, it's not the same as being backed by country subsidies. To be clear, I'm not making a judgment, just saying that meat would probably be a lot more expensive.

I think that for this exact reason Beyond Meat (or other alternatives) need a similar boost, in order to be financially competitive as well.

It’d probably be a better idea to stop the agriculture subsidies and let everyone compete and innovate on a level playing field.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#418

Post by mind-blight »

robertoandred wrote: post #332
makingstuffs wrote: post #129

The problem with Beyond Meat is that it is insanely expensive. I could buy a free range, organic and grass fed beef burger for the price of their ultra processed burger. Don’t get me wrong, as a vegetarian, I think they taste nice. They are just too damn expensive and not particularly healthy which goes against why I am a vegetarian. In Europe we have so many alternatives that are insanely cheaper and, as an Indian,…

> getting some dried minced soy protein, mix with some eggs, breadcrumbs and seasoning before wrapping in some cling film and pressing it into a patty Sounds like processing to me

Cool, we have a semantics issue. Processing can mean "any change to a food item" such as chopping, cooking, etc. In these kinds of conversations, it's often used as "significant alterations that are not possible or common outside of a food lab". E.g. I can do cured meats, or add corn starch to a soup at home. I'm not going to make partially hydrogenated oils or pink slime for chicken nuggets.

If you're being genuine and trying to point out that it's difficult to draw a clear line between "good" and "bad" processing - absolutely! Processes that have been used for a long time (decades, hundreds, or thousands of years) are generally well understood and safer. Newer processes and changes have risks. So, "can I do this in my kitchen" is a great heuristic for trying to walk a very fuzzy line.

If you're deliberately misunderstanding the intent to further an argument, get outta here with that BS :P

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#419

Post by throwpoaster »

hellcow wrote: post #315
evrimoztamur wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Besides ultra-processed foods 'hysteria,' basic ratios I consider here are: - protein to fat (which is roughly 1.4 in Beyond Meat (20g protein / 14g fat in 100g) versus 2.5-3.5 in beef (30±5g protein / 12.5±2.5g fat in 100g)) - protein to mass (20% vs ~30%) - micro-nutrients to mass (a very wide variety of minerals, vitamins, and other unknown nutrients present in beef) - carbohydrates (not present in substantial amo…

> 'we can do it and it may get more people to eat vegetarian.' That's a noble goal in and of itself. Every step to reduce environmental impact and animal cruelty has value. Beyond and Impossible were my "off-ramp" from eating meat every meal to exploring vegetarianism and veganism. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Animal agriculture converts scrub land into carbon sinks that produce food.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#420

Post by mandmandam »

mistercow wrote: post #177
ponector wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Treating food with chemicals usually it's not good. Also you simply don't know what exactly are they doing. Like ultra processed american bread is not so good comparing with european wholegrain sourdough bread.

Consider how broad the phrase “treating food with chemicals” is, and you’ll start to see the problem with this kind of thinking. The word “chemical” includes literally everything that food is made of.

Particularly pointless pedantry. We all know what they mean, and are to assume the best reading of what they're saying.

Bread, the example they used, is a particularly stark example where Americans are subjected to stuff that is rightly banned in most of the rest of the world.

Post reply on HN