Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line • Hacker News Board

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#281

Post by 4ggr0 » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:41 AM UTC

VladVladikoff wrote: post #148

Grimblewald wrote: post #11

I always wondered who their demographic was. The core early adopters, the ethical vegans, who actually like the taste of plants are never going to make a lab made ultra processed salt bomb their daily driver (never mind issues surrounding industrial agriculture). Health-conscious folks would take one look at the ingredient list and bail because of the heavy processing and industrial fillers. You've got bodybuilders a…

Veganism is a fake health conscious diet. You can eat whatever you like while simultaneously feeling superior about it. Oreos, chips, pizza, fries, candy, soda, etc. why not also highly processed burgers? I say this after having lived with vegans who literally ate vegan pizza every day.

so in order for vegans to be legit for you, they not only have to find alternatives for everything, constantly be on the lookout not to accidentally buy or consume products related to animals, no - they also all have to be eating healthy and organic constantly in order not to be phony fakes.

what a weird form of gatekeeping. at least they're using some form of ethics and trying to change the world in a way they're able to.

coming from a non-vegan, btw, even though this shouldn't even be a requirement.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#282

Post by whywhywhywhy » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:43 AM UTC

lambda wrote: post #132

Grimblewald wrote: post #11

I always wondered who their demographic was. The core early adopters, the ethical vegans, who actually like the taste of plants are never going to make a lab made ultra processed salt bomb their daily driver (never mind issues surrounding industrial agriculture). Health-conscious folks would take one look at the ingredient list and bail because of the heavy processing and industrial fillers. You've got bodybuilders a…

This is such a weird comment. Why do you think that "ethical vegans" like the "taste of plants" any more than anyone else? The whole point of being an ethical vegan/vegetarian is to not consume animals, not because you don't like the taste. Health conscious folks would definitely choose these over hamburgers. Sure, they're not perfect from a health food point of view, but they're lower in sodium and saturated fat tha…

> Health conscious folks would definitely choose these over hamburgers

Why? Carbs and processed oils bound together by stodge isn’t healthier than fried ground beef.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#283

Post by CalRobert » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:45 AM UTC

gruez wrote: post #108

thewebguyd wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IMO the core problem is that meat is so heavily subsidized that it's hard for them to compete. This is the real problem. Without all the government subsidies, a pound of ground beef would be closer to $30-$40 today instead of the $8-$10/lb it is now. $38 billion dollars in the US each year to subsidize meat and dairy, but only $17 million goes to fruit and vegetable farmers. It's completely backwards, especially co…

>Without all the government subsidies, a pound of ground beef would be closer to $30-$40 today instead of the $8-$10/lb it is now Source? That seems implausibly high. Using your $38B/year subsidy figure gets us $112/year in subsidies per American. There's no way you can get $30 unsubsidized price from that unless you think the average American only eats beef once a week.

… do they eat more?

I would have thought once a week is high.

Though median could differ from average. 12% of Americans eat half the beef

https://sph.tulane.edu/how-mere-12-americans-eat-half-nation...

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#284

Post by TeMPOraL » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:46 AM UTC

adrian_b wrote: post #251

TeMPOraL wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they're hoping there exists a non-crazy subset of "health conscious" population, i.e. people who are not panicly afraid of "ultra processed" food and generally don't consider food processing to be a sin, who don't see food manufacturing plants as temples of Satan, and are otherwise health conscious and not just playing the fitness fad social games.

There are different classes of food processing, with very different properties. The kinds of food processing methods that remove from raw food the parts that are unhealthy or undesirable cannot have in principle any kind of harmful effect, when the processed food is used correctly. They may have only an indirect harmful effect because the availability of pure food ingredients may enable some people to use such proces…

> The reason is that an industrial producer has very different incentives than those who cook for their family, for friends or relatives, or at least for some loyal customers who appreciate good food. An industrial producer cares only for the appearance and taste of the food, and for its production cost.

Now I'm not denying industrial players have a different set of incentives than people cooking for themselves, but it's not all evil either. They also care about appeasing regulators in countries where food regulations exist, and they may care a bit personally since they themselves and/or their family is eating that too, so I wouldn't necessarily paint them as completely disconnected from the rest of society.

Now, on the other hand, the industrial producers have a few more things going in their favor, such as they actually have quality control metrics, and they are in actual position to make good on caring about food. Home kitchens are not, regular people have neither knowledge nor appreciation of the complex chemistry involved, and even if they did, the equipment used in home kitchens is too crude to allow for consistent quality (not that we can hope for any with no supply chain control either).

(The slightly-fancy restaurants are arguably the worst - they combine all the bad incentives of a high-volume, low-margin commercial operation, with equipment and setup inadequate to guarantee any kind of process quality control. Contrast that with e.g. McDonald's - they may be serving mediocre food at best, but they do it with engineering precision, and you can be sure they aren't just microwaving you an old chicken breast and adding burn marks with an electric grill to make it look like you'd expect for a $50 menu item with a name written in French.)

So the irony is, the industrial producers may have misaligned incentives, but they're also the only ones in position to deliver actually healthy and quality food. Regular people have neither knowledge nor equipment for that, and all the "healthy eating" fads abusing real scientific terms and imbuing them with quasi-religious meaning is not helping. In reality, people just eat stuff and make up stories they don't even verify to feel good with their choices. Which, like with other such belief systems, is fine, until they believe their own stories so much they try to force others to believe in them too.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#285

Post by penguin_booze » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:55 AM UTC

I badly wanted no other market to develop but synthesised meat, to produce something at par with natural one.

The industry has successfully marketed and packaged meat as "that thing you buy", hiding the immense and unconscionable cruelty which sentient beings are subjected to.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#286

Post by ahoka » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:55 AM UTC

tom1337 wrote: post #277

billynomates wrote: post #249

>Beyond Meat CEO Says ‘It’s Just Not The Moment For Plant-Based Meat’ After Rebrand It absolutely is the time for plant-based meat. It has never been more crucial. It's just that their business model was easily replicable.

Also (at least in germany) their burger patties are nearly twice as expensive as groundbeef. I really like them but since I am neither vegan or vegetarian I either opted to groundbeef or to haloumi or something as a replacement. I think the substitutes could work well when they are reasonably priced or actually cheaper than what they want to replace so people are more likely to try it. Same goes with soy milk. Alpro…

It's because the meat industry is a welfare queen. In my local supermarket last year I could buy pork for ~8 EUR by kg, but champignons costed 10 (Nordic country).

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#287

Post by iinnPP » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:56 AM UTC

mcdonje wrote: post #278

rcakebread wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"they're lower in sodium and saturated fat than your average hamburger patty" If you buy a Beyond patty, it has way more sodium than ground beef you'd buy at a grocerty store. Comparing it with a fast food burger isn't really fair.

You're comparing a burger patty to a burger ingredient. Two different things. Not a reasonable comparison.

A burger can be made from that solitary ingredient though.

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#288

Post by tom1337 » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:57 AM UTC

ahoka wrote: post #286

tom1337 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also (at least in germany) their burger patties are nearly twice as expensive as groundbeef. I really like them but since I am neither vegan or vegetarian I either opted to groundbeef or to haloumi or something as a replacement. I think the substitutes could work well when they are reasonably priced or actually cheaper than what they want to replace so people are more likely to try it. Same goes with soy milk. Alpro…

It's because the meat industry is a welfare queen. In my local supermarket last year I could buy pork for ~8 EUR by kg, but champignons costed 10 (Nordic country).

Yea I think its the same in germany (at least with dairy products)

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#289

Post by missingdays » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:57 AM UTC

lithocarpus wrote: post #210

whakim wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no reason to believe that the foods humans have historically eaten are safer/healthier than "industrially processed/extracted/refined" food simply because we have historically eaten them. Evolution does not select for avoiding the health problems facing modern-day humans such as cancer or heart disease.

I'm not saying they're healthier simply because we've historically eaten them. But there are many reasons to believe natural/traditional foods may be safer and healthier than new industrial foods. To name a few: 1) There's reason to believe our bodies may be more adapted to eating natural or traditional foods, having eaten them for hundreds of thousands of years rather than one or two generations. 2) Many highly proc…

> There's reason to believe our bodies may be more adapted to eating natural or traditional foods

By this logic, you shouldn't eat modern meat, as its very different from the one our ancestors were eating. Modern meat is mostly fat

Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line

#290

Post by close04 » Tue, Mar 17, 2026, 9:59 AM UTC

billynomates wrote: post #247

barrell wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a weird comment. It’s ultra processed food devoid of micronutrients with low quality protein and poor bioavailability. Health conscious folks would definitely not choose this. In fact, it’s all the things you try to avoid as soon as you start being health conscious. Folks who want to believe they are being health conscious may be convinced via marketing to buy it, but anyone seriously invested in their n…

Health conscious ethical vegan here. I eat these fairly often. The protein content is fine. I get micronutrients from other sources. I track all my calories and macros, every single day. My diet is perfectly balanced, thanks very much. Something is only unhealthy or healthy in light of everything else you eat. It's reductive to say otherwise.

> I get micronutrients from other sources

Looks like agree that it's not great but you compensate elsewhere. If you chose the "hard way" of limiting your menu to vegan why not pick the options with less compromises? Even paper can be food as long as you compensate elsewhere.

> Something is only unhealthy or healthy in light of everything else you eat. It's reductive to say otherwise.

Are you maybe conflating "unhealthy" with "not explicitly healthy"? Plenty of foods are unequivocally unhealthy, anything else you eat will not compensate. You don't "compensate" for eating a lot of ultraprocessed food because some of the contents of that food should not be in your body at all. You can't always "subtract" by eating other food. Not saying this is the case for you and these burgers.