Beyond Meat S-1 • Hacker News Board

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#221

Post by rayiner » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

turtlesdown wrote: post #217

rayiner wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what's "fairly strange" about it. Meat consumption, for Americans, does not make up a big fraction of our CO2 footprint. Globally it's quite significant, but "get[ting] in front of developing nations eating of ruminants" is a much more politically fraught issue than doing the same in the U.S. My brother and I are 3-4 inches taller than my dad, because we grew up on a meat and dairy rich American diet, ve…

>My brother and I are 3-4 inches taller than my dad, because we grew up on a meat and dairy rich American diet, versus the rice and lentil-based diet my dad grew up with in his village in Bangladesh. No, your dad is likely shorter due to basic malnutrition. Malnutrition is caused by lack of appropriate macro and micro nutrients, irrespective of their source. Studies have shown that properly nourished vegetarians, veg…

Studies show that children who don't drink animal milk are shorter: https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/milk-children-height-1.414983...; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15981182; https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/80/4/1088/4690374

Also, "properly nourished" is a weasel phrase here. You see the exact same phenomenon among the U.S.-raised kids of Bangladeshis/Indians/Pakistanis from very comfortable families. The kids are way taller than parents who did not suffer any malnourishment back home. Just because it is theoretically possible to construct a vegan diet that results in the same growth as a diet including meat and dairy doesn't mean it's easy to do so with the kinds of foods readily available in the developing world.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#222

Post by ajharrison » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

Pfhreak wrote: post #3

I've gone vegetarian, except for a single grass fed animal I bought from a local farmer. (I live in a city, it was easier than I thought it would be to connect with a farmer out in the rural part of my state.) The transition was way, way easier than I thought it was going to be. I didn't guilt myself when I made mistakes, just stopped eating meat unless I was sure the provenance of it was sustainable and free from cr…

So you haven’t gone vegetarian then - you just don’t eat meat a lot.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#223

Post by narrator » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:23 PM UTC

Here comes billions of ideological vegetarianism and virtue signaling dollars. Might as well be a charity. Great business model. Lose money forever to chase a shared ideological purpose for the benefit of investor's ideological salvation.

It's like funding of the building of a church for the PETA crowd.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#224

Post by pembrook » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:28 PM UTC

bluntfang wrote: post #193

wickoff wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not like the animal is going to live forever if you don't kill it. In nature animals are often eaten alive by predators, die from disease, starvation and get horribly injured in competition for mates. A free range animal that's being humanely put down by a farmer has a much more pleasant life. If you go down this rabbit hole deep enough you can begin to question whether life itself should exist.

What we do know for sure is that the animal would not have lived the same life if it weren't captive. >A free range animal that's being humanely put down by a farmer has a much more pleasant life. I don't think we can objectively say this. We have no idea what these animals want. Our humanity for these animals lives is nothing short of projection, purely because we have no idea what they want.

We can 100% objectively say this.

Animals like chickens lack self awareness and the ability for future planning. They operate on instinct. We can prove this. Thus, they also don't know what they want--outside of the immediate satisfaction of an instinctual urge.

They do feel pain and hunger however. In the wild, these animals suffer more pain and hunger. In free range "captivity" they suffer less. It's as simple as that.

I swear most of the arguments against proper free range farming are grounded in either:

a) A fallacious appeal to nature, ie. the false presumption that just because something is "natural" it is automatically better or b) Projection of human awareness and emotional intelligence onto other species

Are factory farms more cruel to animals than proper free range farming? Yes. Is nature more cruel to animals than proper free range farming? Yes.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#225

Post by Accacin » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:30 PM UTC

DamnYuppie wrote: post #179

bluntfang wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>free from cruelty. Do you mind if I ask what your requirements for this are? At the end of the day, isn't ending life cruel, no matter the means?

I guess this is a good place for a rant for some down votes. The concept that death is cruel is ridiculous to me. EVRYTHING DIES, every animal in nature either dies of starvation, freezing to death, dies in a conflict with their own species for breeding rights, or gets to be attacked and eaten alive by a predator. The entirety of nature revolves around life and death struggles. Dying isn't cruel, to think so is a rej…

Not going to downvote you as everyone has an opinion, but this argument is ridiculous. If you're saying everything dies so it doesn't matter, why is it wrong to kill another human? And dying isn't cruel (or the problem - once I'm dead I probably won't care exactly how I died), it's humans killing them that's the problem for people like me.

The fact is it's completely unnecessary. We don't need meat and we waste far too many resources rearing cattle and other animals just to kill and eat them.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#226

Post by turtlesdown » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:32 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #221

turtlesdown wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>My brother and I are 3-4 inches taller than my dad, because we grew up on a meat and dairy rich American diet, versus the rice and lentil-based diet my dad grew up with in his village in Bangladesh. No, your dad is likely shorter due to basic malnutrition. Malnutrition is caused by lack of appropriate macro and micro nutrients, irrespective of their source. Studies have shown that properly nourished vegetarians, veg…

Studies show that children who don't drink animal milk are shorter: https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/milk-children-height-1.414983... ; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15981182 ; https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/80/4/1088/4690374 Also, "properly nourished" is a weasel phrase here. You see the exact same phenomenon among the U.S.-raised kids of Bangladeshis/Indians/Pakistanis from very comfortable families. The…

First, you originally claimed meat as a factor (apparently still after an edit). Second, a vegetarian can eat dairy products. Finally, the only working link above is pretty much worthless (122 participants who were asked questions, measured, and checked again in 3 years) as it does not capture final adult height.

>Also, "properly nourished" is a weasel phrase here.

For sure, just like debating about meat consumption and pivoting to just dairy consumption as proof...

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#227

Post by Accacin » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:37 PM UTC

PerfectElement wrote: post #27

I've been vegan for 15 years, and I've tried all sorts of veggie burgers and mock meats available. Some of them are good, but pretty easy to tell they are not meat. When I first had the Beyond Burger last year (just plain with 2 thin slices of bread) it brought back a very strong memory of how meat used to taste. I wonder if most meat eaters would be able to tell it's not meat on a blind test. I'm curious to try the…

I've been Vegan for a year or so, and I tried the Beyond Burger the other day (in the UK, and I never seen Impossible Burgers over here so I haven't tried) and yeah it was actually pretty good but it was a lot more 'loose' than I'm used to with an actual burger.

For me, meat tastes amazing if I'm honest.. And I've noticed I tend to prefer burgers that aren't pretending to me meat. In a local pub the other day I had a red pepper and spinach burger that was amazingly crispy on the outside.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#228

Post by elhudy » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:38 PM UTC

ppseafield wrote: post #212

elhudy wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Wildlife suffering happens with or without humans, but humans active choose to breed and kill animals when we don't necessarily need to. We could just not do that. You don't support humane slaughter or buying meat from free-range cows, because you think not being brought into existence is better than a happy life with an abrupt ending? What if supporting humane slaughter led to less animals being factory farmed, whi…

> you think not being brought into existence is better than a happy life with an abrupt ending? You're forming the question again in the same way as the article: "You think not being brought into existence is better than a happy life with an abrupt ending?" When really the question is: "You think it's better that humans choose not to bring animals into existence in order to kill them is better than humans choosing to…

>False dichotomy: poor factory farm conditions vs. better factory farm conditions. There is also the option of no factory farms at all, which would be the least amount of suffering at the hands of humans.

When it comes down to it we can just agree to disagree on this point. I believe in a more intermediate future where meat comes from animals that, yes, while being bred for consumption, are happy animals that lived happy lives; lives which would be better than any lack of existence. I believe most meat eaters would realistically support this future as well - if not through their purchasing power then at least potentially by law. Lastly, I believe that getting to this future is through strong support of farmers who have already achieved it.

>Would you choose to be fed okay food, in a pen, until you were about 15, then killed?

This might surprise you but actually I would be inclined to say yes. I would absolutely chose that life over no life [1]. Have you raised farm animals before? They generally feel safer and less agitated in a "pen" of sorts because they view it as protection. They get to socialize all day - and don't usually have to worry about predators or food. Humans aren't motivated by the same environmental dynamics as cows or chicken.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huT5__BqY_U

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#229

Post by autarch » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:44 PM UTC

the_gastropod wrote: post #195

elhudy wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Wildlife suffering happens with or without humans, but humans active choose to breed and kill animals when we don't necessarily need to. We could just not do that. You don't support humane slaughter or buying meat from free-range cows, because you think not being brought into existence is better than a happy life with an abrupt ending? What if supporting humane slaughter led to less animals being factory farmed, whi…

> You don't support humane slaughter or buying meat from free-range cows, because you think not being brought into existence is better than a happy life with an abrupt ending? I'm always amazed when this argument is raised. I can't fathom anyone actually believes more life, for the sake of life, is "better". It strikes me as a bad faith argument. There is a colossal difference between ending a life and preventing one…

> I'm always amazed when this argument is raised. I can't fathom anyone actually believes more life, for the sake of life, is "better". It strikes me as a bad faith argument. There is a colossal difference between ending a life and preventing one from happening.

There are indeed such people. Depending on your particular flavor of utilitarianism, it's a pretty reasonable to conclude that the best things you can do in your life are to A) ensure that there if more life in the future; and B) work to make sure that life is happier than present life.

It basically comes down to how much weight you place on two factors. The first factor is the weight of pleasure (aka happiness, contentment, joy, pick your favorite single word) vs suffering. The second is the weight of present vs future beings.

If you think pleasure outweighs suffering and you are future-oriented then the best possible world is achieved done by increasing the number of happy sentient beings in the universe.

If, OTOH, you believe, as I do, that the negatives of suffering are much stronger than the positives of happiness and you heavily discount future not-yet-existent beings, then you want to focus on eliminating suffering in the present and you should be fairly skeptical of future increases in sentient beings.

Re: Beyond Meat S-1

#230

Post by elhudy » Mon, Apr 22, 2019, 9:47 PM UTC

ppseafield wrote: post #220

elhudy wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>About 21.8% of the world's population is vegetarian [1]. Let me flip your question: Do you think if those billions of people began consuming meat, the world would be the same? Of course not. Assuming meat production could rise to fit this 21.8% increase in demand (it likely couldn't), the planet would be much worse off. So, yes. Although an individual's choice to not eat meat doesn't do much, in aggregate, it's mass…

> I completely agree with you that the world would be a better place if "everyone were to suddenly switch to being vegan." The point is that in aggregate, not much is ever going to change in the short term How does social change happen? It is slow. But it has been happening. Not only are people becoming vegetarian or vegan, but those options are increasingly seen as valid, occasional choices for meat eaters as well.…

>This is a much different argument than you have been making. You're (now) saying people can't be persuaded not to kill animals, so we should do so in a more humane way.

Can you help me to understand where i contradicted myself?