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

The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

outsideonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 253 posts

Re: The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

#141

Post by parliament32 »

monksy wrote: post #2

This whole submarine vegan agenda is annoying. Yes, people will choose to go with the artificial beef. No it's not going to replace beef. It's a subsitute. A few things: 1. Cows are not optimized to make meat: Animals aren't a food factory. Animals eat other animals. We are animals and happen to have a wide variety of what we can eat 2. There are distinct benefits from eating meat (vitamins), in which it's incredibly…

The amount of vegan propaganda out there is outstanding. The thing about these burgers is:

1) they taste like ass

2) they're super-processed full-of-refined-oils junk food

I don't doubt we'll see these phased out of restaurants pretty quick. Right now they're a new fad to try, but sooner or later omnivores will realize there are literally no benefits to eating this crap over actual beef. Only the true vegans will be left, and they're just not enough of a market to sustain the supply chain problems that come with having yet another type of patty (see: the McRib).

The funniest part is actual vegetarian burgers aren't even that bad. Yeah they taste different than beef, but they're in the same format, taste fine, and are quite a bit healthier. This pretend-meat is just bad.

Re: The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

#142

Post by buckthundaz »

ribs wrote: post #37
soperj wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel the same way about vegetables. I know other animals do it all the time, but when you add them up all the plant deaths are horrific.

Right? At least a cow has a chance to run away. But a carrot - it’s stuck in the ground, no legs, no sensory apparatus. It doesn’t have a chance.

Plants use chemicals as defense. For instance, take caffeine which is a neurotoxin.

Re: The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

#143

Post by kian »

WheelsAtLarge wrote: post #84
codesushi42 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a highschool teacher who was vegetarian and would extol its health benefits. She was obese. Not being meat doesn't mean healthy by default. This misconception is becoming as bad as preferring "0 fat, replaced with loads of sugar".

Keep in mind that a vegetarian diet can mean a diet high in grains. Grains will definitely fatten you up if you're not careful on the amount you eat.

I believe this was the other commenter's point - regardless of your diet, you always have to be careful with what you eat, and in what proportions. Nothing about vegetarian diets is automatically healthier than meat-based ones.

Re: The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

#144

Post by intopieces »

zackmorris wrote: post #130
landonxjames wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My digestive system got wrecked trying to be on a mostly vegetarian diet over several years after the housing bubble popped. The gist of it is that the lectins (and other defense mechanisms in the husks) of legumes and nightshades disrupt the mucus lining of the intestines, which leads to leaky gut and stool getting into the body cavity and blood (leaky gut), which may lead to autoimmune diseases like colitis and a…

Ya sorry, it's a relatively new concept: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/319593.php My feeling is that it's similar to how allergies/cancer/etc often have 2 or more triggers that must coincide to set off the condition. So for example, maybe people who wouldn't typically have gluten sensitivity (a lectin), ended up with it because they distrupted their gut flora by eating, say, the glyphosate in oats (especi…

While I don’t doubt your story and haven’t read your link, what is interesting to me is that I have been a vegetarian for 13 years haven’t had any of these symptoms. What explains the variation here?

Re: The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

#146

Post by tptacek »

notJim wrote: post #124
technotony wrote: post #22

The naysayers in the comment thread are missing the understanding that the fundamental technologies driving this are all moving exponentially. Beyond Meat's innovation came from a Stanford professor who is an expert in RNA molecules (he helped them figure out their protein structure/selection), impossible foods is a synthetic biology company. Exponential techs always underwhelm in the beginning but soon deliver more…

Maybe with Impossible Foods, but I don't see anything about RNA here: > The vegan meat substitutes are made from mixtures of pea protein isolates, rice protein, mung bean protein, canola oil, coconut oil, and other ingredients like potato starch, apple extract, sunflower lecithin, and pomegranate powder with a range of vitamins and minerals. Beef products that "bleed" are achieved by using beet juice Just sounds like…

"Veggie burger that tastes better" is kind of a big deal, because (to at least a first approximation) the only reason people don't exclusively eat veggie burgers is that they don't taste better.

Re: The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

#147

Post by dao- »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #87
omarhaneef wrote: post #11

I think the part that rings clearly in my head is the ethical part. I really cannot believe we eat animals. I know other animals do it all the time -- and I don't hold it against tigers and lions -- but its still strange to me that we, humans, do it. If you don't feel that strong surprise, then I think the other arguments may or may not work for you. But if you have that sense that it is strange and perhaps off, then…

>> I really cannot believe we eat animals I don't understand this. We are animals. Why is it specially prohibited to us that we eat other animals? Note also that, as animals, we are not plant-eaters: we can't survive on plant matter alone. We are made [1] to eat other animals. We are omnivores, yes? So why is it unethical for us, specifically, to eat other animals when it's not unethical for other animals? __________…

> So why is it unethical for us, specifically, to eat other animals when it's not unethical for other animals?

You almost answered your own question. "Unethical" is a foreign concept for animals because they don't even have ethics. Humans do, and these ethics have implications for how you should or should not treat other sentient life.

Re: The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

#148

Post by drdrey »

chrisco255 wrote: post #133
artimaeis wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Last time I cooked a Beyond Meat burger I noticed it was 30% canola oil. 30% CANOLA OIL, might as well just inject cholesterol and fast forward a heart attack. Yes, the Beyond Meat burger does have a substantial amount of canola oil. But what's this about cholesterol and heart attack risk? Canola oil is one of the healthier oils - it's low in saturated fats and high in monounsaturated fats which are shown to actual…

You made a couple of invalid claims here: 1) Canola oil is one of the healthier oils. 2) Monounsaturated fats help fight heart disease. 3) Naturally occurring trans fat is the same as industrial trans fat 4) Red meat has health risks EDIT, included sources, with comments: [1] Canola oil may have dramatic negative effect on weight gain and brain health: "Effect of canola oil consumption on memory, synapse and neuropat…

Red meat is classified as probably carcinogenic to humans by the WHO.

https://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red-meat/en/

Re: The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

#149

Post by technothrasher »

Falling3 wrote: post #59
technothrasher wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't hold it against tigers and lions I additionally wouldn't hold it against a tiger or lion for eating me . I'd certainly attempt to avoid it, but I won't blame the animal. Animals eat other animals. We're animals. While not eating other animals seems morally virtuous, I don't necessarily see it as a moral imperative simply because we can think about it in a more abstract way than other animals likely can.

That's a Naturalistic Fallacy. You can justify just about any behavior (theft, murder, rape) by the same reasoning that other animals do it.

It's only the naturalistic fallacy if I was claiming it is good. I wasn't, I was simply claiming it is what we are, so to claim it is wierd or inherently strange is not valid. The claim that it is "bad" may be correct, but it needs to be supported before there is any reason to change our nature.

Re: The Beginning of the End of the Beef Industry?

#150

Post by drdrey »

pranjalv123 wrote: post #40
formalsystem wrote: post #9

I'm starting to think more and more that people promoting plant based burgers have either never tasted beef or never tasted a plant based burger. If the main concern is environment I get it and go for it. But if you are claiming that plant based burgers are healthier or tastier you are borderline delusional. Last time I cooked a Beyond Meat burger I noticed it was 30% canola oil. 30% CANOLA OIL, might as well just in…

Canola oil (and all plant products) have no cholesterol; red meat is high in cholesterol.

Dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol are not the same thing
Post reply on HN