Calorie Counter

You are currently viewing the message boards in:

Thoughts on Beyond Burger and other fake meat

145791024

Replies

  • sharonlemay1sharonlemay1 Posts: 1Member Member Posts: 1Member Member
    I'm here to improve my health, so fake burgers are a no go. I'm looking for real whole foods full of macro and micro nutrients, fiber etc. Those fake burgers will give a person a heart attack as easily as if that person ate beef burgers.
  • SylphadoraSylphadora Posts: 72Member Member Posts: 72Member Member
    just_Tomek wrote: »
    Sylphadora wrote: »
    Sylphadora wrote: »
    Sylphadora wrote: »
    Nope

    Care to share what your specific concern is?

    Sure. The 21 reasons in the ingredient list

    You avoid beet juice?

    I hate beet with a passion so yes, I do avoid it, but I'm more worried about all the vegetable seed oils, starches and sugars. Also, anything with more than 5 ingredients is a frankenfood. Have you ever used 21 ingredients in a recipe?

    Yeap. Many times.

    And have you ever used methylcellulose, succinic acid, maltodextrin or any of the other chemical-sounding ingredients in a recipe? I don't buy anything with ingredients my grandmother wouldn't recognize. I'm strongly anti-processed food. The fact that it's processed vegan food doesn't make it any healthier. It still seems that it came out of a lab instead of a kitchen
  • lemurcat2lemurcat2 Posts: 4,911Member Member Posts: 4,911Member Member
    Sylphadora wrote: »
    Sylphadora wrote: »
    Sylphadora wrote: »
    Nope

    Care to share what your specific concern is?

    Sure. The 21 reasons in the ingredient list

    You avoid beet juice?

    I hate beet with a passion so yes, I do avoid it, but I'm more worried about all the vegetable seed oils, starches and sugars. Also, anything with more than 5 ingredients is a frankenfood. Have you ever used 21 ingredients in a recipe?

    Lots of times.
  • lemurcat2lemurcat2 Posts: 4,911Member Member Posts: 4,911Member Member
    I'm here to improve my health, so fake burgers are a no go. I'm looking for real whole foods full of macro and micro nutrients, fiber etc. Those fake burgers will give a person a heart attack as easily as if that person ate beef burgers.

    All foods have macronutrients, so looking for foods full of them isn't a very hard thing.

    For micros, I think we have to analyze the products specifically and be clear on what it is being compared to.

    The heart attack thing seems extreme. Nutrition, for the most part, is about overall diet and what we do eat, as well as dosage. I noted above that my dad quit red meat other than for special occasional (same with dairy fat) since it helped control his cholesterol, but having a rare but occasional burger (or steak, which he would typically prefer) does not have any negative effects for him.

    There are arguments to be had about whether sat fat from plants have the same effects as sat fat from animal products for those who tend to have some negative responses to them -- I don't think the evidence is clear yet. But the idea that 21 ingredients = must be bad and unhealthy is, IMO, not a particularly sensible approach to nutrition.

    (I'm coming from this from the perspective that one can easily have a healthful, nutrient-dense diet that includes occasional beef, and that the same is true with occasional plant-based beef substitutes. Other factors are much more important in determining whether a diet is healthful, IMO (and from what I've read of the research and from experts in the field I consider trustworthy).)
  • janejellyrolljanejellyroll Posts: 22,106Member Member Posts: 22,106Member Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    Sylphadora wrote: »
    Sylphadora wrote: »
    Sylphadora wrote: »
    Nope

    Care to share what your specific concern is?

    Sure. The 21 reasons in the ingredient list

    You avoid beet juice?

    I hate beet with a passion so yes, I do avoid it, but I'm more worried about all the vegetable seed oils, starches and sugars. Also, anything with more than 5 ingredients is a frankenfood. Have you ever used 21 ingredients in a recipe?

    Yes.

    I don't see how the ingredient count is a rational criterion for anything, really.

    I think you and I might not be terribly far apart in what our actual practice is. I prefer to moderate my consumption of foods that are mainly extracts (or lab-created ingredients) intended to deliver some single nutrient or property; or that have had a lot of the natural components processed out of them.

    This is not a religious principal (using "religion" in a metaphorical sense here, BTW). I'll eat those things without fear of poisoning. My reasons have more to do with feeling there are end-cases where food-based nutrients seem to be more readily metabolized than supplements/extractives, plus the recognition that large numbers of essential or beneficial nutrients have been "discovered" in my lifetime, that were in foods all along. I don't think we're done with discoveries.

    Because of that, I think eating a pretty major fraction of my diet in the form close to how it came out of the ground (or critter, or whatever) is a reasonable bet-hedge. It's also the reason why I consider "highly processed" traditional foods that have been widely eaten for centuries to be a better bet than novelties.

    My personal taste-preference experience is that I usually enjoy these closer-to-origin or traditional foods more than the novel things, too; but I see that as personal idiosyncracy, kind of like some people liking asparagus when others don't.

    In giving advice to others here, I still think the biggest deal is that people in general ought to strive for overall good nutrition (macros, known micros, sensible calories), and that however they choose to do that is just fine.

    Beyond that, calling other people's food disparaging names doesn't seem to me very likely to be a great tactic for persuading them to avoid those foods. (I'm not at all interested in undertaking that persuasion; I'm just confused by the tactic when it seems to be used in service of advocacy. I'm not sure advocacy is what's intended by the quoted post, however, either.)

    I think the key difference here is that you choose to get most of your calories from certain foods because of a rational belief that food-based nutrients are better than us (an idea I also share, although I acknowledge it has not yet been fully proven). But if a specific food appealed to you in the moment, you would probably eat it (assuming it fit into your goals, etc) because you don't have the mistaken belief that one particular meal is going to cancel out the overall healthful pattern of your diet. That is, you don't believe the food will cause inherent harm.

    This, to me, is the difference between your position and the positions that strike me as more "religious."

    (Apologies if I'm not accurately describing your position).
  • poisonessepoisonesse Posts: 469Member Member Posts: 469Member Member
    Personally... I don't want to eat a ton of synthesized chemicals, I have nothing against meat, so I'll stay within my comfort zone.
Sign In or Register to comment.