Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Vegan Milk
MikePfirrman
Posts: 3,307 Member
in Debate Club
Perfect Day, a startup that I've been following out of curiosity more than anything else (and I know a few of the engineers involved), now has Vegan products, including Ice Cream, out in stores.
Basically, this company, through fermentation methods that have existed for years, has grown milk proteins in a lab that are lactose free and animal cruelty free (they just needed some dairy DNA to start). So no veal, no cruelty of dairy farms, but this is supposed to taste identical to real dairy.
They are out in stores already as "Brave Robot" ice cream. Just wondering if vegans on here would get on board with that or still stick with plant based foods. My wife can't do cow dairy, even if it's lactose free, so I'll likely stick to the non-dairy versions.
Have no idea how expensive it is yet.
Basically, this company, through fermentation methods that have existed for years, has grown milk proteins in a lab that are lactose free and animal cruelty free (they just needed some dairy DNA to start). So no veal, no cruelty of dairy farms, but this is supposed to taste identical to real dairy.
They are out in stores already as "Brave Robot" ice cream. Just wondering if vegans on here would get on board with that or still stick with plant based foods. My wife can't do cow dairy, even if it's lactose free, so I'll likely stick to the non-dairy versions.
Have no idea how expensive it is yet.
0
Replies
-
At this point, I have substitutes that meet my needs so I probably wouldn't switch to buying it myself.
If I was out at a restaurant and there was an appealing looking dish that used it, I would consider ordering it once I'd read more about it to understand the potential safety implications (not saying there are any, just that I haven't read about it yet). I don't have an ethical objection to lab-created milk.
I read about the potential for this a few years ago and I'm surprised it's already to market. Very interesting stuff.4 -
janejellyroll wrote: »At this point, I have substitutes that meet my needs so I probably wouldn't switch to buying it myself.
If I was out at a restaurant and there was an appealing looking dish that used it, I would consider ordering it once I'd read more about it to understand the potential safety implications (not saying there are any, just that I haven't read about it yet). I don't have an ethical objection to lab-created milk.
I read about the potential for this a few years ago and I'm surprised it's already to market. Very interesting stuff.
I believe I read they are to Series C funding (which is for production scale funding, which typically means proof of concept and taste are there). I'm a bit surprised too that they are to market this soon but the Series C funding was like $200M, so they have a lot of investments made into it.
It's a large gamble. That's why I was curious to hear from some vegans. My daughter doesn't do dairy (for the same ethical reasons as most vegans), but I haven't had a chance to ask her.
No clue what it costs. I would bet it's expensive, like $10 a pint expensive.
Edit -- I found an article on TechCrunch that it's $5.99. I'm surprised it's that cheap. I live in Tucson and under their "finder" online, it said my local Albertson's already have it. I'll have to check that out. I'm with you. Not sure I would try it from a store but it is interesting.0 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »At this point, I have substitutes that meet my needs so I probably wouldn't switch to buying it myself.
If I was out at a restaurant and there was an appealing looking dish that used it, I would consider ordering it once I'd read more about it to understand the potential safety implications (not saying there are any, just that I haven't read about it yet). I don't have an ethical objection to lab-created milk.
I read about the potential for this a few years ago and I'm surprised it's already to market. Very interesting stuff.
I believe I read they are to Series C funding (which is for production scale funding, which typically means proof of concept and taste are there). I'm a bit surprised too that they are to market this soon but the Series C funding was like $200M, so they have a lot of investments made into it.
It's a large gamble. That's why I was curious to hear from some vegans. My daughter doesn't do dairy (for the same ethical reasons as most vegans), but I haven't had a chance to ask her.
No clue what it costs. I would bet it's expensive, like $10 a pint expensive.
Edit -- I found an article on TechCrunch that it's $5.99. I'm surprised it's that cheap. I live in Tucson and under their "finder" online, it said my local Albertson's already have it. I'll have to check that out. I'm with you. Not sure I would try it from a store but it is interesting.
If that $5.99 is the actual price, that's much lower than what I would expect. I would have guessed at least $10, like you did.
I feel like the target market here may not actually be vegans, but people who are open to replacing some milk (sort of like how the Impossible Burger market *includes* vegans, but is going to rely on curious non-vegans in order to actually make money). As you of course know from your own life, most of us who have replaced dairy for health or ethical reasons already have substitutes that are easy to find and fall into our preferred price range. But I'm always interested to see where the technology is going.
(If they make a good blue cheese, this will be a completely different story -- I haven't found a good vegan one yet!).2 -
@janejellyroll -- I can totally relate to the blue cheese thing. I promised my wife I wouldn't eat cow dairy when she couldn't, so I went cold turkey for her. After four years of either of us not eating any (at all), we went back to limited goat and sheep cheeses. When I found out Roquefort was actually sheep, I nearly wept!
There is a cheesemaker out there that has a book on how to make your own Vegan Blue, because I looked into it. He has a blog and it looks brilliant.
This guy -- it looks like a lot of work, but I was certainly considering it for a while.
https://fullofplants.com/vegan-blue-cheese/3 -
I will definitely buy these products because I stopped eating dairy for ethical reasons, not health ones. If no cows are being harmed, then I will support it.4
-
Reading the company is/was looking for dairy DNA, was a red flag to me on an ethical level how on earth can they call the product Vegan- to me that equals no animal input at any stage ever. Some poor animal somewhere will have had the initial donation taken from them, they are not consulted "its just what happens to them in the world of farming". The process screams, Over processing of foods, but any none dairy milk by its nature is processed, possibly even overly processed. I hope to goodness this product does not cross the Atlantic to get here.
I avoid bovine dairy because of the casein content, I react to t4 casein dominant in bovine herds. There are some exceptions where over history a herd has been living in isolation, cut off from other herds, thinking Guernsey cattle as we know them here. Casein accreditation for A2 or T2 milks is by testing. Sheep and Goat dairy is type 2 casein dominant naturally which aligns with human milk and is more easily digested by many. Types 3 and 4 are generally less problematic, type 1 casein is present in all milk but to a much lesser extent. I needed to understand the issue when it was identified in me.
Why, Oh why, do so many systems only recognise Lactose as "the only" dairy issue when it is the sugar in bovine milk rather than casein which are the proteins. In many other dietary circumstances its the type of protein which cause problems.1 -
Reading the company is/was looking for dairy DNA, was a red flag to me on an ethical level how on earth can they call the product Vegan- to me that equals no animal input at any stage ever. Some poor animal somewhere will have had the initial donation taken from them, they are not consulted "its just what happens to them in the world of farming". The process screams, Over processing of foods, but any none dairy milk by its nature is processed, possibly even overly processed. I hope to goodness this product does not cross the Atlantic to get here.
I avoid bovine dairy because of the casein content, I react to t4 casein dominant in bovine herds. There are some exceptions where over history a herd has been living in isolation, cut off from other herds, thinking Guernsey cattle as we know them here. Casein accreditation for A2 or T2 milks is by testing. Sheep and Goat dairy is type 2 casein dominant naturally which aligns with human milk and is more easily digested by many. Types 3 and 4 are generally less problematic, type 1 casein is present in all milk but to a much lesser extent. I needed to understand the issue when it was identified in me.
Why, Oh why, do so many systems only recognise Lactose as "the only" dairy issue when it is the sugar in bovine milk rather than casein which are the proteins. In many other dietary circumstances its the type of protein which cause problems.
I suppose they are looking more at the fact that you are removing at least two cruel things (that I know of) -- the captivity of cows and the killing of males for veal. To me, it's an improvement for sure.
My wife can't do lactose free as easily as A2/A2 dairy either. I was actually hoping they would manufacture A2/A2 milk proteins. Might be something in the future they do, who knows.
It's also an improvement in terms of sustainability. Less water, less resources. Pure fermentation.3 -
Totally agree on the veal issue.2
-
MikePfirrman wrote: »@janejellyroll -- I can totally relate to the blue cheese thing. I promised my wife I wouldn't eat cow dairy when she couldn't, so I went cold turkey for her. After four years of either of us not eating any (at all), we went back to limited goat and sheep cheeses. When I found out Roquefort was actually sheep, I nearly wept!
There is a cheesemaker out there that has a book on how to make your own Vegan Blue, because I looked into it. He has a blog and it looks brilliant.
This guy -- it looks like a lot of work, but I was certainly considering it for a while.
https://fullofplants.com/vegan-blue-cheese/
I think I'm going to try this. I've made some vegan cheese before, but nothing this complicated.1 -
Reading the company is/was looking for dairy DNA, was a red flag to me on an ethical level how on earth can they call the product Vegan- to me that equals no animal input at any stage ever. Some poor animal somewhere will have had the initial donation taken from them, they are not consulted "its just what happens to them in the world of farming". The process screams, Over processing of foods, but any none dairy milk by its nature is processed, possibly even overly processed. I hope to goodness this product does not cross the Atlantic to get here.
I avoid bovine dairy because of the casein content, I react to t4 casein dominant in bovine herds. There are some exceptions where over history a herd has been living in isolation, cut off from other herds, thinking Guernsey cattle as we know them here. Casein accreditation for A2 or T2 milks is by testing. Sheep and Goat dairy is type 2 casein dominant naturally which aligns with human milk and is more easily digested by many. Types 3 and 4 are generally less problematic, type 1 casein is present in all milk but to a much lesser extent. I needed to understand the issue when it was identified in me.
Why, Oh why, do so many systems only recognise Lactose as "the only" dairy issue when it is the sugar in bovine milk rather than casein which are the proteins. In many other dietary circumstances its the type of protein which cause problems.
"No animal input at any stage ever" would eliminate a number of plant foods as well (insects are used for pollination, animal products are included in many fertilizers). I'm not saying I don't understand the position of rejecting this particular use of animal DNA as non-vegan, I just don't think saying veganism is about "no animal input at any stage ever" is something that we can currently practice unless we're in a very rare and fortunate situation.7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Reading the company is/was looking for dairy DNA, was a red flag to me on an ethical level how on earth can they call the product Vegan- to me that equals no animal input at any stage ever. Some poor animal somewhere will have had the initial donation taken from them, they are not consulted "its just what happens to them in the world of farming". The process screams, Over processing of foods, but any none dairy milk by its nature is processed, possibly even overly processed. I hope to goodness this product does not cross the Atlantic to get here.
I avoid bovine dairy because of the casein content, I react to t4 casein dominant in bovine herds. There are some exceptions where over history a herd has been living in isolation, cut off from other herds, thinking Guernsey cattle as we know them here. Casein accreditation for A2 or T2 milks is by testing. Sheep and Goat dairy is type 2 casein dominant naturally which aligns with human milk and is more easily digested by many. Types 3 and 4 are generally less problematic, type 1 casein is present in all milk but to a much lesser extent. I needed to understand the issue when it was identified in me.
Why, Oh why, do so many systems only recognise Lactose as "the only" dairy issue when it is the sugar in bovine milk rather than casein which are the proteins. In many other dietary circumstances its the type of protein which cause problems.
"No animal input at any stage ever" would eliminate a number of plant foods as well (insects are used for pollination, animal products are included in many fertilizers). I'm not saying I don't understand the position of rejecting this particular use of animal DNA as non-vegan, I just don't think saying veganism is about "no animal input at any stage ever" is something that we can currently practice unless we're in a very rare and fortunate situation.
This is very insightful, and I'm surprised I never thought about it. Vegans often avoid honey because of how it's produced. It's those same bees that make almond farming possible. Of course almond honey isn't marketed because it's so bitter. The list of plant foods that require honeybees is pretty long. To be sure, I'm a fan of providing better habitat for native pollinators, like mason bees, but I'm not sure they can complete the task. I know they could pollenate fruit trees like apples, pears, and persimmons, and maybe some bush fruits like blueberries. I see LOTS of honeybees on my raspberries, marionberries, squash, chile plants, cucumbers, tomatoes, grapes, and so much more. I had never considered a vegan might try to avoid plants pollenated by honeybees. That would be a huge limitation. I also never even thought about using manure as fertilizer being an issue.
Wow.
Thanks for that enlightening thought.
2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Reading the company is/was looking for dairy DNA, was a red flag to me on an ethical level how on earth can they call the product Vegan- to me that equals no animal input at any stage ever. Some poor animal somewhere will have had the initial donation taken from them, they are not consulted "its just what happens to them in the world of farming". The process screams, Over processing of foods, but any none dairy milk by its nature is processed, possibly even overly processed. I hope to goodness this product does not cross the Atlantic to get here.
I avoid bovine dairy because of the casein content, I react to t4 casein dominant in bovine herds. There are some exceptions where over history a herd has been living in isolation, cut off from other herds, thinking Guernsey cattle as we know them here. Casein accreditation for A2 or T2 milks is by testing. Sheep and Goat dairy is type 2 casein dominant naturally which aligns with human milk and is more easily digested by many. Types 3 and 4 are generally less problematic, type 1 casein is present in all milk but to a much lesser extent. I needed to understand the issue when it was identified in me.
Why, Oh why, do so many systems only recognise Lactose as "the only" dairy issue when it is the sugar in bovine milk rather than casein which are the proteins. In many other dietary circumstances its the type of protein which cause problems.
"No animal input at any stage ever" would eliminate a number of plant foods as well (insects are used for pollination, animal products are included in many fertilizers). I'm not saying I don't understand the position of rejecting this particular use of animal DNA as non-vegan, I just don't think saying veganism is about "no animal input at any stage ever" is something that we can currently practice unless we're in a very rare and fortunate situation.
This is very insightful, and I'm surprised I never thought about it. Vegans often avoid honey because of how it's produced. It's those same bees that make almond farming possible. Of course almond honey isn't marketed because it's so bitter. The list of plant foods that require honeybees is pretty long. To be sure, I'm a fan of providing better habitat for native pollinators, like mason bees, but I'm not sure they can complete the task. I know they could pollenate fruit trees like apples, pears, and persimmons, and maybe some bush fruits like blueberries. I see LOTS of honeybees on my raspberries, marionberries, squash, chile plants, cucumbers, tomatoes, grapes, and so much more. I had never considered a vegan might try to avoid plants pollenated by honeybees. That would be a huge limitation. I also never even thought about using manure as fertilizer being an issue.
Wow.
Thanks for that enlightening thought.
I want to clarify: I don't believe there are any vegans who try to avoid plants pollinated by honeybees, I was using that as an example of how I don't think the "no animal input at any stage ever" is a useful way to implement veganism.
I think one can make an ethical case against cow DNA-derived dairy without having to adopt the "no animal input at any stage every" rule. I also think it's possible to make a case that cow DNA-derived dairy could be part of ethical veganism.
There is such a thing as "veganic" agriculture, but it is still in early stages and I don't think it would possible for most vegans to meet their calorie/dietary variety needs just eating food produced by this method. I do support those who are trying to find more widely sustainable ways to do this though.
In terms of veganism, I do think there are things that are absolutely non-vegan and things that are absolutely vegan. And then I think there are a lot of things that sincere and thoughtful vegans can disagree on and while I've certainly had fun in the past delving into the fights over these things, I'm less convinced now that it's very helpful to anyone except as a way to practice how to define and articulate a vegan ethics. So I would respect someone who decided never to eat cow DNA-derived dairy as an expression of their veganism, while not necessarily sharing that position.
As a side note, I do think it will be important -- as these types of foods proliferate -- that we have some kind of pool of common terms to describe what is involved in the production of them. For example, someone who is avoiding dairy products for reasons of health may now be buying products marked "vegan" because it's a shorthand way to know they don't contain dairy. But if in the future we have products like this or lab-grown meat, we'll need a way to describe them so people who want to ethically avoid the exploitation of animals can identify them, but those who are avoiding them because of pure concerns over consuming them (that is, a non-ethical objection) can still avoid them. I'll be really curious to see how labeling evolves over this.
5 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I want to clarify: I don't believe there are any vegans who try to avoid plants pollinated by honeybees, I was using that as an example of how I don't think the "no animal input at any stage ever" is a useful way to implement veganism.
Oh, no need to clarify. I got what you wrote. It's just I had never even CONSIDERED the idea. I know when I considered veganism (I didn't eat meat for about 30 years but never pushed over to veganism), I wasn't so sure that I would avoid honey. Or yeast, since fungus is more closely related to animals than plants.janejellyroll wrote: »In terms of veganism, I do think there are things that are absolutely non-vegan and things that are absolutely vegan. And then I think there are a lot of things that sincere and thoughtful vegans can disagree on and while I've certainly had fun in the past delving into the fights over these things, I'm less convinced now that it's very helpful to anyone except as a way to practice how to define and articulate a vegan ethics. So I would respect someone who decided never to eat cow DNA-derived dairy as an expression of their veganism, while not necessarily sharing that position.
As a side note, I do think it will be important -- as these types of foods proliferate -- that we have some kind of pool of common terms to describe what is involved in the production of them. For example, someone who is avoiding dairy products for reasons of health may now be buying products marked "vegan" because it's a shorthand way to know they don't contain dairy. But if in the future we have products like this or lab-grown meat, we'll need a way to describe them so people who want to ethically avoid the exploitation of animals can identify them, but those who are avoiding them because of pure concerns over consuming them (that is, a non-ethical objection) can still avoid them. I'll be really curious to see how labeling evolves over this.
Thank you again for this insight. I pretty much agree with what you write here. It will indeed be interesting to watch. I remember thinking it was very odd that some Rabbis ruled that a tomato with pig genes would be kosher because it was so far removed from a pig. Then again, lots of Jews who sort of keep kosher eat pork eggrolls with a similar justification.
1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »I want to clarify: I don't believe there are any vegans who try to avoid plants pollinated by honeybees, I was using that as an example of how I don't think the "no animal input at any stage ever" is a useful way to implement veganism.
Oh, no need to clarify. I got what you wrote. It's just I had never even CONSIDERED the idea. I know when I considered veganism (I didn't eat meat for about 30 years but never pushed over to veganism), I wasn't so sure that I would avoid honey. Or yeast, since fungus is more closely related to animals than plants.janejellyroll wrote: »In terms of veganism, I do think there are things that are absolutely non-vegan and things that are absolutely vegan. And then I think there are a lot of things that sincere and thoughtful vegans can disagree on and while I've certainly had fun in the past delving into the fights over these things, I'm less convinced now that it's very helpful to anyone except as a way to practice how to define and articulate a vegan ethics. So I would respect someone who decided never to eat cow DNA-derived dairy as an expression of their veganism, while not necessarily sharing that position.
As a side note, I do think it will be important -- as these types of foods proliferate -- that we have some kind of pool of common terms to describe what is involved in the production of them. For example, someone who is avoiding dairy products for reasons of health may now be buying products marked "vegan" because it's a shorthand way to know they don't contain dairy. But if in the future we have products like this or lab-grown meat, we'll need a way to describe them so people who want to ethically avoid the exploitation of animals can identify them, but those who are avoiding them because of pure concerns over consuming them (that is, a non-ethical objection) can still avoid them. I'll be really curious to see how labeling evolves over this.
Thank you again for this insight. I pretty much agree with what you write here. It will indeed be interesting to watch. I remember thinking it was very odd that some Rabbis ruled that a tomato with pig genes would be kosher because it was so far removed from a pig. Then again, lots of Jews who sort of keep kosher eat pork eggrolls with a similar justification.
Oh wow, I'd never heard that about the tomato with pig genes and the discussion about whether or not it was kosher. That's interesting. I think it gets back to the same root issue, how far removed does something have to be before it's removed "enough."
So in a sense, it's the same conversation we're already having -- as vegans -- about things like thrift store leather/wool, Impossible foods doing initial testing on rats, sugar filtered through bone char, etc.1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »I want to clarify: I don't believe there are any vegans who try to avoid plants pollinated by honeybees, I was using that as an example of how I don't think the "no animal input at any stage ever" is a useful way to implement veganism.
Oh, no need to clarify. I got what you wrote. It's just I had never even CONSIDERED the idea. I know when I considered veganism (I didn't eat meat for about 30 years but never pushed over to veganism), I wasn't so sure that I would avoid honey. Or yeast, since fungus is more closely related to animals than plants.janejellyroll wrote: »In terms of veganism, I do think there are things that are absolutely non-vegan and things that are absolutely vegan. And then I think there are a lot of things that sincere and thoughtful vegans can disagree on and while I've certainly had fun in the past delving into the fights over these things, I'm less convinced now that it's very helpful to anyone except as a way to practice how to define and articulate a vegan ethics. So I would respect someone who decided never to eat cow DNA-derived dairy as an expression of their veganism, while not necessarily sharing that position.
As a side note, I do think it will be important -- as these types of foods proliferate -- that we have some kind of pool of common terms to describe what is involved in the production of them. For example, someone who is avoiding dairy products for reasons of health may now be buying products marked "vegan" because it's a shorthand way to know they don't contain dairy. But if in the future we have products like this or lab-grown meat, we'll need a way to describe them so people who want to ethically avoid the exploitation of animals can identify them, but those who are avoiding them because of pure concerns over consuming them (that is, a non-ethical objection) can still avoid them. I'll be really curious to see how labeling evolves over this.
Thank you again for this insight. I pretty much agree with what you write here. It will indeed be interesting to watch. I remember thinking it was very odd that some Rabbis ruled that a tomato with pig genes would be kosher because it was so far removed from a pig. Then again, lots of Jews who sort of keep kosher eat pork eggrolls with a similar justification.
Oh wow, I'd never heard that about the tomato with pig genes and the discussion about whether or not it was kosher. That's interesting. I think it gets back to the same root issue, how far removed does something have to be before it's removed "enough."
So in a sense, it's the same conversation we're already having -- as vegans -- about things like thrift store leather/wool, Impossible foods doing initial testing on rats, sugar filtered through bone char, etc.
Are there tomatoes with pig genes, or was that just a hypothetical?
Also, if a vegan were to adopt a "no animal input at any stage" philosophy, would that mean not eating food planted, tended, harvested, processed, or packaged by non-vegans, since the energy they are putting into the production of food came from the exploitation of animals?0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »I want to clarify: I don't believe there are any vegans who try to avoid plants pollinated by honeybees, I was using that as an example of how I don't think the "no animal input at any stage ever" is a useful way to implement veganism.
Oh, no need to clarify. I got what you wrote. It's just I had never even CONSIDERED the idea. I know when I considered veganism (I didn't eat meat for about 30 years but never pushed over to veganism), I wasn't so sure that I would avoid honey. Or yeast, since fungus is more closely related to animals than plants.janejellyroll wrote: »In terms of veganism, I do think there are things that are absolutely non-vegan and things that are absolutely vegan. And then I think there are a lot of things that sincere and thoughtful vegans can disagree on and while I've certainly had fun in the past delving into the fights over these things, I'm less convinced now that it's very helpful to anyone except as a way to practice how to define and articulate a vegan ethics. So I would respect someone who decided never to eat cow DNA-derived dairy as an expression of their veganism, while not necessarily sharing that position.
As a side note, I do think it will be important -- as these types of foods proliferate -- that we have some kind of pool of common terms to describe what is involved in the production of them. For example, someone who is avoiding dairy products for reasons of health may now be buying products marked "vegan" because it's a shorthand way to know they don't contain dairy. But if in the future we have products like this or lab-grown meat, we'll need a way to describe them so people who want to ethically avoid the exploitation of animals can identify them, but those who are avoiding them because of pure concerns over consuming them (that is, a non-ethical objection) can still avoid them. I'll be really curious to see how labeling evolves over this.
Thank you again for this insight. I pretty much agree with what you write here. It will indeed be interesting to watch. I remember thinking it was very odd that some Rabbis ruled that a tomato with pig genes would be kosher because it was so far removed from a pig. Then again, lots of Jews who sort of keep kosher eat pork eggrolls with a similar justification.
Oh wow, I'd never heard that about the tomato with pig genes and the discussion about whether or not it was kosher. That's interesting. I think it gets back to the same root issue, how far removed does something have to be before it's removed "enough."
So in a sense, it's the same conversation we're already having -- as vegans -- about things like thrift store leather/wool, Impossible foods doing initial testing on rats, sugar filtered through bone char, etc.
Are there tomatoes with pig genes, or was that just a hypothetical?
Also, if a vegan were to adopt a "no animal input at any stage" philosophy, would that mean not eating food planted, tended, harvested, processed, or packaged by non-vegans, since the energy they are putting into the production of food came from the exploitation of animals?
I don't know - I was just responding to a reference someone else made.
That's an interesting question about how a "no animal input at any stage" philosophy vegan would respond to food produced by human energy from eating non-vegan food. I have no idea how they would respond, but since it would limit them to food produced either by themselves or those known to be vegan, it would be almost impossible to realistically implement (but, IMO, it would also be very challenging to implement a sourcing strategy that eliminated food involving fertilizing with animal products or insect pollination).1 -
The point I was making from experience, (having had dil having a hissy fit at my parents about a piece of meat passing over a plate!) She would not accept dna extraction for the dairy substitute product or any other product yet to be imagined even as a vegetarian, she is now vegan.
Bees visit plants to use the pollen, without pollen many insects would die, we benefit from the fruits and seeds. All land and sea animals produce excrement - in the wild its freely dispersed so the plants and bugs can make use of it for life. So things which happen naturally aught to be ok, being established in the way the world works. Things which can only, happen hygienically in a science lab are totally different. Cultivating plants introducing pollen from one to another, if the seeds form a cross which is more productive than the parents and that is used, its natural but taking dna etc from a living thing plant or what ever introducing it into something totally different with no known outcome, only the guess, I'm yet to be convinced.
0 -
I'm a vegan and I'd be on board with it, especially if there were a very authentic cheese made from it
I think it'd have a lot of potential pull for people who love cheese to try vegan alternatives 3 -
The point I was making from experience, (having had dil having a hissy fit at my parents about a piece of meat passing over a plate!) She would not accept dna extraction for the dairy substitute product or any other product yet to be imagined even as a vegetarian, she is now vegan.
I have a lot of vegan friends (including myself ^_^) and there are very very occasionally people who react this way to non-vegan food. But occasionally when I do find people really upset like this, they usually tend to be fairly new to veganism and have only recently accepted some hard and pretty disturbing truths, so they tend to be very raw and bothered by these things. After a while, they tend to accept that things are the way they are and the best you can do is try and be calm and nice to others to try and meet them in the middle, but it can definitely be hard at first.
Some people stay very strict about it in the long-run, but in the interest of personal sustainability and not driving yourself mad, people who've been vegan for years tend to have relaxed a little over time 8 -
The point I was making from experience, (having had dil having a hissy fit at my parents about a piece of meat passing over a plate!) She would not accept dna extraction for the dairy substitute product or any other product yet to be imagined even as a vegetarian, she is now vegan.
Bees visit plants to use the pollen, without pollen many insects would die, we benefit from the fruits and seeds. All land and sea animals produce excrement - in the wild its freely dispersed so the plants and bugs can make use of it for life. So things which happen naturally aught to be ok, being established in the way the world works. Things which can only, happen hygienically in a science lab are totally different. Cultivating plants introducing pollen from one to another, if the seeds form a cross which is more productive than the parents and that is used, its natural but taking dna etc from a living thing plant or what ever introducing it into something totally different with no known outcome, only the guess, I'm yet to be convinced.
Your daughter-in-law's approach to veganism isn't the only one. I, and many other vegans I've encountered, don't have a standard of "no animal input at any stage" because we realize that isn't a realistic goal right now.
When you say "no animal input at any stage," you were not making a distinction between activities engaged in by animals in the wild versus controlled by humans. If you're now introducing that you recognize that distinction, I accept that. I'll point out that in many cases of modern agriculture, the pollination is NOT taking place by wild insects, but insects are moved from place to place deliberately by farmers. So if you're saying that the first is acceptable for someone practicing a vegan ethics and the second isn't, you'll have to explain how on earth a vegan -- as a consumer -- is supposed to distinguish between the two.
And you might also want to address how you expect a vegan to approach crops fertilized with animal byproducts. Does your daughter-in-law avoid these? Because those are absolutely "animal input" as well.
As far as your daughter-in-law's "hissy fit" about meat passing over her plate -- it's not at all uncommon for picky eaters to not want foods they have an aversion to passing directly over their own food or plate, as it may drip down. This isn't part of vegan ethics, although some vegans may have an aversion to meat. I personally have developed a strong aversion to the smell of ground beef cooking in the years I've been a vegan. This is not at all related to an ethical position and shouldn't be used as an argument that cooking ground beef is somehow more morally problematic than other forms of animal exploitation. It's just an aversion, like not wanting meat to pass directly over your plate.1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »The point I was making from experience, (having had dil having a hissy fit at my parents about a piece of meat passing over a plate!) She would not accept dna extraction for the dairy substitute product or any other product yet to be imagined even as a vegetarian, she is now vegan.
Bees visit plants to use the pollen, without pollen many insects would die, we benefit from the fruits and seeds. All land and sea animals produce excrement - in the wild its freely dispersed so the plants and bugs can make use of it for life. So things which happen naturally aught to be ok, being established in the way the world works. Things which can only, happen hygienically in a science lab are totally different. Cultivating plants introducing pollen from one to another, if the seeds form a cross which is more productive than the parents and that is used, its natural but taking dna etc from a living thing plant or what ever introducing it into something totally different with no known outcome, only the guess, I'm yet to be convinced.
Your daughter-in-law's approach to veganism isn't the only one. I, and many other vegans I've encountered, don't have a standard of "no animal input at any stage" because we realize that isn't a realistic goal right now.
When you say "no animal input at any stage," you were not making a distinction between activities engaged in by animals in the wild versus controlled by humans. If you're now introducing that you recognize that distinction, I accept that. I'll point out that in many cases of modern agriculture, the pollination is NOT taking place by wild insects, but insects are moved from place to place deliberately by farmers. So if you're saying that the first is acceptable for someone practicing a vegan ethics and the second isn't, you'll have to explain how on earth a vegan -- as a consumer -- is supposed to distinguish between the two.
And you might also want to address how you expect a vegan to approach crops fertilized with animal byproducts. Does your daughter-in-law avoid these? Because those are absolutely "animal input" as well.
As far as your daughter-in-law's "hissy fit" about meat passing over her plate -- it's not at all uncommon for picky eaters to not want foods they have an aversion to passing directly over their own food or plate, as it may drip down. This isn't part of vegan ethics, although some vegans may have an aversion to meat. I personally have developed a strong aversion to the smell of ground beef cooking in the years I've been a vegan. This is not at all related to an ethical position and shouldn't be used as an argument that cooking ground beef is somehow more morally problematic than other forms of animal exploitation. It's just an aversion, like not wanting meat to pass directly over your plate.
Just a real quick funny story related to that. My daughter became a strict vegetarian at age 9. Though we tried to get her to eat meat (we honestly just weren't educated on it ourselves), she was committed.
I did the cooking at home and, after giving up after a year or so of encouraging her to eat like us, I respected her decision and completely separated any food, pan, utensil that I used in the kitchen for her. My wife, who likes to stroll into the kitchen, would go to grab a meat gravy spoon (or similar) and go to stir her food. When I'd tell her "don't do that...", she'd respond, "what's the difference?". My daughter saw her one time and was horrified! For around 10 years, while she lived at home, my wife had to stay out of the kitchen completely. She was banned.2 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »The point I was making from experience, (having had dil having a hissy fit at my parents about a piece of meat passing over a plate!) She would not accept dna extraction for the dairy substitute product or any other product yet to be imagined even as a vegetarian, she is now vegan.
Bees visit plants to use the pollen, without pollen many insects would die, we benefit from the fruits and seeds. All land and sea animals produce excrement - in the wild its freely dispersed so the plants and bugs can make use of it for life. So things which happen naturally aught to be ok, being established in the way the world works. Things which can only, happen hygienically in a science lab are totally different. Cultivating plants introducing pollen from one to another, if the seeds form a cross which is more productive than the parents and that is used, its natural but taking dna etc from a living thing plant or what ever introducing it into something totally different with no known outcome, only the guess, I'm yet to be convinced.
Your daughter-in-law's approach to veganism isn't the only one. I, and many other vegans I've encountered, don't have a standard of "no animal input at any stage" because we realize that isn't a realistic goal right now.
When you say "no animal input at any stage," you were not making a distinction between activities engaged in by animals in the wild versus controlled by humans. If you're now introducing that you recognize that distinction, I accept that. I'll point out that in many cases of modern agriculture, the pollination is NOT taking place by wild insects, but insects are moved from place to place deliberately by farmers. So if you're saying that the first is acceptable for someone practicing a vegan ethics and the second isn't, you'll have to explain how on earth a vegan -- as a consumer -- is supposed to distinguish between the two.
And you might also want to address how you expect a vegan to approach crops fertilized with animal byproducts. Does your daughter-in-law avoid these? Because those are absolutely "animal input" as well.
As far as your daughter-in-law's "hissy fit" about meat passing over her plate -- it's not at all uncommon for picky eaters to not want foods they have an aversion to passing directly over their own food or plate, as it may drip down. This isn't part of vegan ethics, although some vegans may have an aversion to meat. I personally have developed a strong aversion to the smell of ground beef cooking in the years I've been a vegan. This is not at all related to an ethical position and shouldn't be used as an argument that cooking ground beef is somehow more morally problematic than other forms of animal exploitation. It's just an aversion, like not wanting meat to pass directly over your plate.
Just a real quick funny story related to that. My daughter became a strict vegetarian at age 9. Though we tried to get her to eat meat (we honestly just weren't educated on it ourselves), she was committed.
I did the cooking at home and, after giving up after a year or so of encouraging her to eat like us, I respected her decision and completely separated any food, pan, utensil that I used in the kitchen for her. My wife, who likes to stroll into the kitchen, would go to grab a meat gravy spoon (or similar) and go to stir her food. When I'd tell her "don't do that...", she'd respond, "what's the difference?". My daughter saw her one time and was horrified! For around 10 years, while she lived at home, my wife had to stay out of the kitchen completely. She was banned.
0 -
Casein Allergy here so I will stick to unsweetened soymilk. Works well for cooking and coffee. Neutral taste.2
-
kristingjertsen wrote: »Casein Allergy here so I will stick to unsweetened soymilk. Works well for cooking and coffee. Neutral taste.
I love soy. As someone that doesn't really have to eliminate dairy, it's my go to. I have a large sack of organic soy beans and have gotten a Chufa-Mix (I think that's what it's called) but haven't been brave enough to make soy milk on my own. You have to soak, blend, strain and then heat soy milk. Lots of steps but been wanting to eliminate all the vegetable oils in the store bought stuff.1 -
MikePfirrman wrote: »kristingjertsen wrote: »Casein Allergy here so I will stick to unsweetened soymilk. Works well for cooking and coffee. Neutral taste.
I love soy. As someone that doesn't really have to eliminate dairy, it's my go to. I have a large sack of organic soy beans and have gotten a Chufa-Mix (I think that's what it's called) but haven't been brave enough to make soy milk on my own. You have to soak, blend, strain and then heat soy milk. Lots of steps but been wanting to eliminate all the vegetable oils in the store bought stuff.
Making my own soy milk is something that I really want to try. I've read the directions a few times . . . that counts for something, right?4 -
The objection I share is to the DNA being required at all. Animals are still being exploited even if it is less so. I would like to know the nutritional values attached too this product for a full evaluation for it being any better than the range of grain/seed milks on the market. As it stands my opinion is "go without". No animal DNA, no animal harm.
I would have more respect for those of you females so very anxious to have a "good cheese" or similar texture had some of you volunteered your own DNA for use in this product. You would have had the choice to be exploited or not rather than this being another "product input" expected of some animal. Your donation of DNA will have the added benefits of providing something more in keeping with humanities needs with a lesser allergy rate. Or is this idea too repugnant for you?
As for the use of animal excrement. Unless you spray it directly on the growing plants, its applied in the autumn which gives time for the weathering process to happen and it will be reduced to its finer particles. If one owns a horse for recreation or relaxation or donkey, what would you do with the piles of excrement at your stables, you still have to pick up from fields where the animals are grazing for most of the time. You prefer the idea of petrochemicals being used instead?
Thank you for the comment, your wife banned from the kitchen. I hope your wife and your daughter will be reconciled. My dil has not changed in 30 years, I can see her changing now, she took a simple action as a personal snub. The rift her actions caused a deep rift in the family.
0 -
The objection I share is to the DNA being required at all. Animals are still being exploited even if it is less so. I would like to know the nutritional values attached too this product for a full evaluation for it being any better than the range of grain/seed milks on the market. As it stands my opinion is "go without". No animal DNA, no animal harm.
I would have more respect for those of you females so very anxious to have a "good cheese" or similar texture had some of you volunteered your own DNA for use in this product. You would have had the choice to be exploited or not rather than this being another "product input" expected of some animal. Your donation of DNA will have the added benefits of providing something more in keeping with humanities needs with a lesser allergy rate. Or is this idea too repugnant for you?
As for the use of animal excrement. Unless you spray it directly on the growing plants, its applied in the autumn which gives time for the weathering process to happen and it will be reduced to its finer particles. If one owns a horse for recreation or relaxation or donkey, what would you do with the piles of excrement at your stables, you still have to pick up from fields where the animals are grazing for most of the time. You prefer the idea of petrochemicals being used instead?
Thank you for the comment, your wife banned from the kitchen. I hope your wife and your daughter will be reconciled. My dil has not changed in 30 years, I can see her changing now, she took a simple action as a personal snub. The rift her actions caused a deep rift in the family.
"Those of you females"? Yikes.
There's nothing repugnant about human milk. I consumed it happily for the first few years of my life, so I don't know why anyone would find the idea repugnant. If someone wanted my DNA to product a milk for commercial use, I would certainly consider it (although why they would want MINE in particular, I have no idea).
A lot of your argument against this product seems to depend on a disgust reaction. I'm an ethical vegan, I don't feel repulsed by dairy products. I have an ethical objection to the condition in which cows are kept to produce them for us, as well as the way male calves and "spent" dairy cows are treated. This new product would involve none of those issues. As I have already said, I understand the objection to using an animal's DNA without their consent.
I'm not sure what the relevance of the "weathering" comments are. The reason I brought up animal-based fertilizers (which include blood and bone meal as well as manure) is because they directly address the claim that veganism requires us to avoid a product that has any animal inputs. It's not a safety concern about manure, it's not disgust towards the concept of animal-based fertilizer. It's a literal case of animal involvement that must be addressed if one is rejecting any product that involves "animal input at any stage." Insect pollination (both wild and human-controlled) would also have to be addressed. It isn't that I "prefer" the idea of petrochemicals, it's that your argument is incoherent unless you can explain why animal input is okay in these two case when it is part of your definition of veganism.
My position is that you would be well-served to adopt another model of veganism, as "no animal input at any stage" doesn't really work.
I think this whole conversation would be much more useful if we decouple the disgust reaction you seem to be playing on and just discuss the ethical issues.
14 -
As someone not vegan, but leaning into sustainability more and more, I find that alienating people or having Vegan purity tests is counterproductive. It turns folks off. And that's a shame.7
-
MikePfirrman wrote: »As someone not vegan, but leaning into sustainability more and more, I find that alienating people or having Vegan purity tests is counterproductive. It turns folks off. And that's a shame.
It makes it seem like veganism is a list of arbitrary rules and restrictions rather than a comprehensive ethical position on animal exploitation.
The longer I'm vegan, the more I'm interested in discussing WHY something should or shouldn't be considered vegan rather than using a legalistic metric to determine what is and isn't "allowed."
The purpose of this isn't to "allow" more things under veganism but to really get to the "whys" behind the decisions we're making. Just like any system of ethics involving humans, the "whys" matter.8 -
@janejellyroll -- completely agree. And the more I'm educated on veganism, the more I lean that way. But it's not because someone told me to or someone said I'm evil and guilted me into it. It's the internal moral compass that knows some of the dietary choices I've made aren't the most compassionate. And that same compassion needs to be directed at those exploring options for the right reasons, not criticism about them not doing more.
My daughter has done a lot to educate me and I've done a lot to help her with food choices/nutritional choices. In addition to ethical considerations, there's more and more proof that a supplemented (just a few supplements) vegan diet is likely the healthiest diet out there. Vegan Omegas is a prime example of a product that was desperately needed for vegans/vegetarians like my daughter. Awesome development. My wife also takes Algae based omegas now as well. And, over time, I've gotten my meat and potatoes girl to be a lot more open to eating plant based several times a week.
It's baby steps for some. But you don't scream at a baby when it takes its first steps because it didn't take 3 steps.6
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 422 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions