Beyond Meat fights for survival • Hacker News Board

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#641

Post by unlikelytomato » Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 4:10 AM UTC

xk_id wrote: post #635

seec wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came to the same conclusion. I always wonder if they are completely delusional and ignore every issue to favor their bias or just don't have the problems that we get. From spending quite a lot of time with those people, my opinion is that they generally are pretty dishonest and will deny the truth to fit their ideology.

Just drink protein shakes? There are soy protein ones that are completely inoffensive and pea protein which isn’t tasty but much cheaper. Do professional athletes actually eat only meat to meet their protein requirements? Because even if you’re not a vegan I imagine that amount of meat every day gets pretty gross.

those do not digest well for me.

Yes, many athletes with large metabolic demands do eat mostly meat. Gross or not, it is functional. I eat for function. Choking down chicken breasts is not fun, but it works very well for results.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#642

Post by sandspar » Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 6:59 AM UTC

xedrac wrote: post #324

sandspar wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's crappy meat. Have you ever had cheap salmon sashimi? It's completely flavorless, with a rubbery, watery mouthfeel. Conversely have you had expensive salmon sashimi? A delicate umami flavor with a mouthfeel of liquified butter. It's not preparation. They're not the same fish. Different subspecies of plant and animal taste different. Farmers have learned to charge more for the ones that taste better. You wouldn…

I was thinking about beef when I wrote this, and specifically cuts of beef you would commonly see at a supermarket.

I'm sorry I jumped on you. I saw an opportunity to show off at your expense and I took it. Thanks for your calm answer - it reminds me to work on my etiquette.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#643

Post by jebarker » Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 3:13 PM UTC

UltraSane wrote: post #634

jebarker wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point to any supporting evidence for the claim that humans have evolved an innate “finding meat delicious trait” or alternatively evidence that suggests it’s not purely cultural? I’m genuinely interested as I haven’t found any evidence supporting the claim.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/mar/07/how-early-hu...

I don’t believe that article supports your claim. It doesn’t claim humans innately prefer meat smell/taste, just that we evolved to seek out smell and flavor complexity, which cooking— meat or otherwise - provides. You could just as easily make the same argument about cooked vegetables vs raw vegetables and claim humans have an innate desire for vegetables.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#644

Post by UltraSane » Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 4:12 PM UTC

jebarker wrote: post #643

UltraSane wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/mar/07/how-early-hu...

I don’t believe that article supports your claim. It doesn’t claim humans innately prefer meat smell/taste, just that we evolved to seek out smell and flavor complexity, which cooking— meat or otherwise - provides. You could just as easily make the same argument about cooked vegetables vs raw vegetables and claim humans have an innate desire for vegetables.

Veganism would be a lot more popular if people really found the taste of plants much more delicious than the taste of meat.

Re: Beyond Meat fights for survival

#645

Post by mistercow » Fri, Jul 25, 2025, 11:21 AM UTC

mandmandam wrote: post #420

mistercow wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Actually, no, we don’t know what they mean. This is the foundation of the great motte and bailey that so much nutrition nonsense is based on. People say “chemicals”, and then they can gesture at a food label with a few obscure sounding ingredients and say “ooh, look how scary”. But for the vast majority of these “chemicals”, there is absolutely no reason to think that consuming them is a problem.

Anyway, since “we all know”, why don’t you go check out the ingredients for beyond burgers, and report back which “chemicals” you think are so disastrous.