Does anyone know the latest findings from studies that linked soy consumption to estrogen increase in men? The impossible burger being non soy based was a huge selling point for me...
The soy-estrogen link is totally bunk/false IIRC
Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
361–370 of 538 posts
Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
The industrial meat/ag complex loves that you think of their products as coming from the sort of happy pasture-grazing farms you see on the side of the highway.
Most of them do. Chickens are the main exception, and I would agree that their conditions are pretty bad. Downvoters - I live in the Midwest. I grew up on a farm. Much of my family still farms and raises livestock. Factory farming of livestock is not the norm for non-poultry.
According to the ASPCA, over 95% of farm animals in the U.S. are raised in factory farms[0]:
[0] https://www.aspca.org/animal-cruelty/farm-animal-welfare
According to Dr. Hershaft, a holocaust survivor which has dedicated his life to researching animal rights, it is estimated that less than 1% of the meat in the US are from smallscale family farms, he and his team did an AMA on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2h8df0/i_am_an_80year...
Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
When compared to meat there is almost no doubt that Impossible is better for the environment. Impossible has an environmental mission first. Checkout the sustainability report from 2017 http://www.ift.org/~/media/Food%20Technology/Weekly/IF_Susta... Or the update from 2018 https://impossiblefoods.com/if-pr/2018-Impact-Update/
Does this mean the company will sell it for as cheap as possible regardless of profit? And release all IP of course? If not, the purpose is to make money and the "mission" is just marketing BS.
At the very least, they have investors[0].
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impossible_Foods#Financing
Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if the 'proselytizing' was environmental instead? Switching away from meat would lessen your footprint considerably, and likely improve your health[1] even if you don't care about the moral arguments. 1: http://time.com/4266874/vegetarian-diet-climate-change/
By the environmental footprint argument, I could do far greater good for it by murdering the person with the largest footprint, and altering the remainder of my lifestyle not at all. To ask those with the smallest prints to wear smaller shoes is ridiculous while some still wear a different yacht on each foot. You ask the man with the ha'penny to give a farthing, while the man on the gold throne is unmolested. If I sa…
If we combine your comment with the one about not having children... do we end up with A Modest Proposal?
Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find this interesting. I tried an Impossible Burger a while ago and I didn't find it to taste like meat at all.
Since they are only available in restaurants (until March 2019), this may have something to do with the preparation method used. I've read in reviews of the product that if you overcook it, such that all the pink color in the middle of the patty is eliminated, it does not taste as good. I've had it in burger patty form on a bun with lettuce, tomato, pickles, ketchup, mustard, and mayo. I've also had it crumbled up in…
Makes plenty of sense. Real beef doesn't taste as good when you overcook it too.
Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
When compared to meat there is almost no doubt that Impossible is better for the environment. Impossible has an environmental mission first. Checkout the sustainability report from 2017 http://www.ift.org/~/media/Food%20Technology/Weekly/IF_Susta... Or the update from 2018 https://impossiblefoods.com/if-pr/2018-Impact-Update/
Does this mean the company will sell it for as cheap as possible regardless of profit? And release all IP of course? If not, the purpose is to make money and the "mission" is just marketing BS.
That’s not really true.
They would need change their model to meat based burgers after they gain market share for their mission to be BS. Profit has nothing to do with it.
What you are proposing would prevent them from building a healthy company that can maximize market share and have the largest possible beneficial impact on the environment. I want them to drive all the meat based competitors out of business.
Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
#367Earlier quoted context omitted.
The dishes I mentioned aren't considered desserts. They are main courses.
Well, I am Austrian, and I consider them both desserts and main courses.
I guess you Austrians must be doing things wrong :-). In Bavaria I have never seen Kaiserschmarrn as dessert.
Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting, this might be why soy is pressed for its oil before being used as cattle feed. The resulting patties are used as feed and the oil byproduct is sold.
I don’t think that’s the case. It is not feasible for a farmer to buy feed during the lifetime of the animal. It’s the reason they have huge pastures for grazing during warm months. During winter they are usually fed hay. All beef is grass fed period. Some are finished at the end with corn or other dense grains (your soy patties). Here’s an article from a Meat Scientist. https://meatscience.org/TheMeatWeEat/topics/ra…
> All beef is grass fed period. Some are finished at the end with corn or other dense grains (your soy patties).
Visit the Harrison Ranch (on I-5, south-east of SF), and see for yourself how they're treated.
Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of curiosity, what eats more animals, humans or the rest of the animal kingdom?
Spiders consume twice the biomass of all adults on earth every year, so I think it's safe to say: Animals. Both in number as well as in weight, even if all humans adopted the US lifestyle (120kg meat/year).
Okay. I'm thinking that animal suffering ought not be the metric here, in that case.
Re: Meat-free 'Impossible Burger 2.0' tastes even closer to the real deal
#370i tried at rubis diner the 1.0 version and i was surprised how good it was but was way too salty and krispy like some alternative meat but still meat. they are on the right track so am expecting greatness for 2.0.