531–540 of 645 posts
It’s interesting that alternative meat consumption in the U.S. is struggling but taking off in Europe. One thing I noticed after moving to the UK: alternative milk is normalized here. Like, it’s so common to avoid milk that if you order coffee without specifying, you will be asked what kind of milk you want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When we look at the places that have experienced degrowth in this country such as the midwestern cities Do they work without subsidies from the growing parts of the country?
Look at the map in this linked article (1). Seems like southern states are the ones getting most subsidy. Midwest for the most part relatively lower on the spectrum. And what is even the subsidy? Interstate road works? Hardly matters to your daily life. The other subsidies are probably things like welfare benefits or medicaid, which might be a significant thing in your daily life if you qualify but if you don't are a…
Sure does if you want trucked vegetables in the winter!
> think it is pretty solely due to the relationship between the size and rate of growth of the local high income demographic and housing inventory
The American housing market is broken. You are absolutely correct in that shrinking Rust Belt cities sidestep this problem by being in the rare position of housing surplus.
What I’m challenging is the notion that life in those cities would be as nice as it is if the entire country copied their population and economic contraction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These studies are legitimately worthless, and I'll explain why. 1. Ultra-processed foods contain a lot of hyper-palatable foods. You have to understand that UP foods is an absurdly broad category. When you measure the harm of UP foods, you're not measure the harm of UP foods - you're measuring the harm of hyper-palatable foods, because naturally those are the foods people gravitate towards. Because they taste good an…
1. If you had read the study, you'd know that they control for sociodemographic factors, lifestyle and health-related behaviors. So your point doesn't hold. 2. Second article says it's fructose specifically. And the ultra-processed form allows instant assimilation of it, far from the classic forms found in nature. They also allow to add much more of it. See: https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/how-hi…
Which means they are looking at people who already don't eat UP foods and comparing them to people who do. But UP foods are more likely to be hyper-palatable.
So you're comparing foods that are likely to be hyper-palatable to those that aren't. That's what you're measuring.
If you conduct a double-blind study where you compare UP foods that are NOT hyper-palatable to non UP foods that are NOT hyper-palatable you won't find a difference. Such a study does not exist, because it's almost impossible to do.
People who are already health conscious will be healthier. You're not forcing anyone to eat healthier, so you're not measuring anything valuable.
2. HFCS is 60% fructose, sugar is 50% fructose. Does that 10% increase make a difference? Yes. But it's miniscule. If you replace all HFCS with sugar, you lower your fructose intake only a tiny bit.
Also appeal to nature is stupid. It's just dumb and nobody cares about that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The company's products in my and other people's views have caused a significant wane in vegetarian and vegan burger diversity. Gone are the chickpea and black bean burgers on menus—your only choice is Beyond Meat-esque burgers. As someone who doesn't actually really like how Beyond Meat tastes, it's unfortunate that it's the only option sometimes. As someone who likes food variety and practically needs it, eliminatin…
Ive never understood the drive to make meat substitutes instead of celebrating vegetarian cuisine. I’m not a vegetarian, but if I eat some dish that is vegetarian, why wouldn’t I want to celebrate the vegetable itself made from instead of trying to make some fake meat that never quite hits the mark?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the same policy whether it's real meat patties or beyond meat, because beyond beef has the same main ingredient as the feed for the cattle: soybeans.
Beyond Beef derives its protein from peas, and explicitly advertises "no soy".
There is WAY too much competition from regular meat, to bean/tofu/other vegetarian options that alternative meat just can't compete with on price.
From what I've seen, Vow (https://www.eatvow.com/) are the only company that has taken a different approach and gone ultra-high end with their "cultured meats". Rather than trying to re-create a simple burger, they've made meats that can't exist in the real world. Their Japanese Qual Foix Gras has been available in Singapore for a while now and is coming to Sydney this month (I believe).
This product is only sold at ultra-high end restaurants where people want the experience and are willing to pay for it.
Vow didn't need to scale manufacturing to huge levels and try to boil the ocean all at once. They have a step by step plan ala Tesla where they start with the ultra-small scale very expensive foods, then move slightly down market, and continue until they are able to make affordable mass-market cultured foods for everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your experience is not universal and just because you haven't seen anybody do it doesn't mean that people haven't. If anything it is your take that is reddit tier. Nobody forces you to buy that stuff, people who want to eat that stuff do. Have you tried being any less entitled?
Considering that this manufacturer of ersatz meat is unprofitable and bordering on insolvent, it seems that people do not, empirically, want to eat it.
Words and phrases have meaning. That's not what empirical evidence means.
Because there's only single manufacturer of plant based products, right? and it's not as if meat isn't heavily subsidized by the government otherwise. Pfft.
And you know why plant based milk is shelved next to milk? SO PEOPLE CAN FIND IT. People don't want to go to another specialized aisle just to find products.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. If you had read the study, you'd know that they control for sociodemographic factors, lifestyle and health-related behaviors. So your point doesn't hold. 2. Second article says it's fructose specifically. And the ultra-processed form allows instant assimilation of it, far from the classic forms found in nature. They also allow to add much more of it. See: https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/how-hi…
1. No actually it does hold - these are still observational studies. Which means they are looking at people who already don't eat UP foods and comparing them to people who do. But UP foods are more likely to be hyper-palatable. So you're comparing foods that are likely to be hyper-palatable to those that aren't. That's what you're measuring. If you conduct a double-blind study where you compare UP foods that are NOT…
Besides the study doesn't studies obesity (it is a control), but depression, which isn't linked to food being palatable or not.
2. Sugar is itself a highly processed food. HFCS contains more fructose, which saturates faster the intestine's absorption capacity.
Sugar is mostly derived from beetroot and sugar cane. Of course you can get diabetes from fruits or sugar beets alone, that said it's much harder than from eating UP foods.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Animal agriculture converts scrub land into carbon sinks that produce food.
This is a regionally-contingent oversimplification that obscures the much more essential fact that animal agriculture always requires substantially more land than arable agriculture to produce the same amount of food. Land is very much a finite resource and I personally would prefer to see a bit more of it left to nature (or "scrub", as you call it).
Most land is scrub. You can like leaving more of it that way, but no one else will notice in percentage terms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 bul…