Thoughts on Beyond Burger and other fake meat

nutmegoreo wrote: »

Carlos_421 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

There is already a chicken pizza crust being sold for the keto crowd, but no "sky is falling" racket around that one.

The bacon crust one had tons of keto tags attached when I searched as well, but I left that out.

I mean a real product, not a recipe.

So that's basically an unbreaded flattened chicken parmigiana with some pepperoni on top?

Edited to add: LOL at the "Only minimally processed" on the box. I guess their definition of not processed is rather generous.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea of "minimally processed" pepperoni.

Maybe I'm just wrong headed (as usual ), but that actually seems like using the word more like I'd use it in daily life: "Minimally processed XYZ" would be XYZ made through the simplest possible (minimal) process.

Foods like pepperoni are (IMO) traditional foods, and there's a traditional process for making them. I'm guessing it's a lot simpler than the modern mass-production methods. You grind up meats, mix them with spices and some minimal saltpeter (a mineral), stuff them in a casing, and dry/age them. It's not hyper-dramatically processed, in my view, i.e., not a lot of taking out chemical components, mixing in other extracted stuff, to the point where it's denatured.

It doesn't seem a lot more processed, to me, than many cheeses, tofu, etc.

Saltpeter is an ingredient in gunpowder!!!
Do you really want to be eating gunpowder???

ETA: Gunpowder is delicious on pizza.

Adds some extra bang for your buck?

oh very clever

lemurcat2 wrote: »

I really don't understand the "if you have an ethical objection to X, how can you like how it tastes" argument. Like I don't quite get why people think that.

If you stop doing something you enjoyed because of ethical concerns and could get the enjoyment without any violation of your ethics, why wouldn't you consider that a possibility?

My mom quit smoking 40 years ago because she didn't want to get lung cancer, but she loves the smell of cigarettes and says if they told her tomorrow smoking was actually healthy she'd jump in the car and run out to buy a pack.

There are plenty of people out there who love the taste of meat but struggle with the ethics of modern food production and are trying to cut back or source better options, many with the goal of eventual vegetarianism or veganism. The reason they aren't there yet is often because they enjoy those foods and are struggling to replace them. I enjoy eating meat, but would jump at the chance to eat other foods with similar macros and taste that didn't require animals to be involved.

Vegetarianism and veganism can come from different motivators. While for some people the thought of what meat is is disgusting and they've never had any desire to eat it, others are fine with the idea of humane or ethical use of animals but abstain due to a lack of a guarantee that any food or product they have access to was obtained humanely. Also, you can like the taste (or smell or sound or feel) of something and hate what it is. Some folks are great at compartmentalizing and are able to enjoy a taste without automatically attributing it to something that disturbs them, while other people can't naturally do that and struggle with immediately associating tastes or smells or sounds with negative associations.

ETA: Perhaps it's tied into how you were raised. All I knew about the first foods I ate when I was little was they came from the grocery store, it didn't occur to me to think of a burger as cow meat or ham as a pig until a bit later. I was completely removed from the animal-foods industry. But I once found an abandoned bird's egg with little chick parts in the "yolk" and was never able to eat a runny yolk again.

kshama2001 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

There is already a chicken pizza crust being sold for the keto crowd, but no "sky is falling" racket around that one.

The bacon crust one had tons of keto tags attached when I searched as well, but I left that out.

I mean a real product, not a recipe.

So that's basically an unbreaded flattened chicken parmigiana with some pepperoni on top?

Edited to add: LOL at the "Only minimally processed" on the box. I guess their definition of not processed is rather generous.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea of "minimally processed" pepperoni.

It says it's 'Uncured.' What does that actually mean? It's uncured pepperoni essentially raw?

Uncured = still sick/diseased.

Because it's the kind of thread where words play like that.

(And because it may prove necessary.)

Speaking of word play, my Honda Accord has a sticker that says "Partial Zero Emissions vehicle." Huh?

mbaker566 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

mbaker566 wrote: »

out of curiosity...
if you don't want to eat meat for ethical concerns, why would you want to eat something that tastes like it? I've never really gotten the point of "fake" meat

Because for an ethical vegan, the problem is the *process* that results in the meat, the impact to the individuals involved. There is no ethical problem with the taste or texture of meat. Some of us enjoyed it a great deal.

It's kind of like how many people enjoy some interpersonal activities very much when everyone involved is enjoying them, but those same activities become repugnant if not everyone is a willing participant. A sensory experience (of any type,not just taste) can be great if nobody is being hurt, but objectionable if someone is suffering as a result.

but it still tastes like something that is made objectionably. why eat it?
if i objected to guns, i probably wouldn't play with fake ones...

Because it has the same delicious taste, without being made objectionably...?

Your gun comparison might be valid if fake meat desensitised people towards real meat. How would that work in your head?

mbaker566 wrote: »

i understand what you all are saying but I can't really agree with it.
i wouldn't wear fake leather or fake fur either if i were a vegan but whatever if it works for you.

What do you mean by 'I can't agree with it'? You think we're wrong about our own tastes, reasons and decisions?

kshama2001 wrote: »

AnnPT77 wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

snickerscharlie wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

There is already a chicken pizza crust being sold for the keto crowd, but no "sky is falling" racket around that one.

The bacon crust one had tons of keto tags attached when I searched as well, but I left that out.

I mean a real product, not a recipe.

So that's basically an unbreaded flattened chicken parmigiana with some pepperoni on top?

Edited to add: LOL at the "Only minimally processed" on the box. I guess their definition of not processed is rather generous.

I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea of "minimally processed" pepperoni.

It says it's 'Uncured.' What does that actually mean? It's uncured pepperoni essentially raw?

Uncured = still sick/diseased.

Because it's the kind of thread where words play like that.

(And because it may prove necessary.)

Speaking of word play, my Honda Accord has a sticker that says "Partial Zero Emissions vehicle." Huh?

I just sat here reading that sentence three times in a row, hoping it would make more sense. Nope.

lemurcat2 wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

mbaker566 wrote: »

ceiswyn wrote: »

mbaker566 wrote: »

i understand what you all are saying but I can't really agree with it.
i wouldn't wear fake leather or fake fur either if i were a vegan but whatever if it works for you.

What do you mean by 'I can't agree with it'? You think we're wrong about our own tastes, reasons and decisions?

i'm saying your reasoning doesn't make sense to me. but again, whatever works for you

If you were vegan would you quit: eating jello, using shampoo and conditioners, using paintbrushes, doing your makeup, and many other products just because they usually contain non-vegan ingredients? Using a synthetic paint brush should not really be an issue for a vegan, but you're saying it should. How does that make sense?

Yes, you explained well why mbaker's argument is one that I don't so much disagree with, but just don't follow at all. Or why would the same argument not mean that vegans should avoid soy milk, as that is largely used because it somewhat shares the taste and mouthfeel and use of milk, and also has a similar protein content?

I think kimny's answer helped me somewhat -- the line of thought must be that someone eating a plant-based product intended to taste like beef is mimicking the experience of "eating cow." Instead, I think they are enjoying an experience of eating a tasty food that is usually (but not necessarily) made from beef. And I would add that I don't think most meat eaters enjoy a burger because it is the experience of "eating cow." I think they mostly don't think much about where the food comes from and unless they are specifically eating food they hunted for themselves aren't likely to be thinking about the animal much at all, more the taste. They simply are okay with that taste (and the nutrients it comes with) being provided by the animal.

This is an interesting topic to me. My guess, just based on observations and experience, is that most people aren't actively thinking of the animal and experiencing pleasure specific to the action of eating them when they're eating meat. It's a pleasure of taste and texture, not a pleasure based on the actions that brought the animal to the state of being meat.

I think the exceptions would be hunters/farmers, who may feel pride/pleasure/pleasant associations with memories of the hunt or raising the animal (similar, perhaps, to how a gardener may feel when they're eating vegetables they grew themselves?) and maybe some people who have spiritual/mystical associations with the specific practice of consuming the body of someone who used to be alive (I've seen some people who are part of the "humane meat" community talk about quite specific pleasures of eating someone who they felt had a happier life than is usually given animals within the farming system).

Once you take this relatively small group of people out, I think there are people who enjoy meat and would even avoid faux meat due to concerns about processing/ingredients/unnaturalness, but still aren't actively focusing on how it all comes together.

When I ate meat, I certainly wouldn't have classified eating an individual animal as one of the pleasures of eating meat. It was simply something that had to happen so that I could eat meat, something that I thought was relatively inevitable. So once eating an animal was no longer acceptable to me, I had no problem with the opportunity to continue the "eating meat" part without the need to eat an animal.

I do think the argument that vegans should avoid meatlike products doesn't really make sense to me, given that we commonly eat foods that replicate milk, butter, cheese, etc. We also have a pretty widespread acceptance of things like portobello burgers. I guess my question for those who oppose faux meat on supposed ethical grounds would be "Where do you draw the line of what is 'too much' like an animal product to be okay?"

kimny72 wrote: »

janejellyroll wrote: »

lemurcat2 wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

mbaker566 wrote: »

ceiswyn wrote: »

mbaker566 wrote: »

i understand what you all are saying but I can't really agree with it.
i wouldn't wear fake leather or fake fur either if i were a vegan but whatever if it works for you.

What do you mean by 'I can't agree with it'? You think we're wrong about our own tastes, reasons and decisions?

i'm saying your reasoning doesn't make sense to me. but again, whatever works for you

If you were vegan would you quit: eating jello, using shampoo and conditioners, using paintbrushes, doing your makeup, and many other products just because they usually contain non-vegan ingredients? Using a synthetic paint brush should not really be an issue for a vegan, but you're saying it should. How does that make sense?

Yes, you explained well why mbaker's argument is one that I don't so much disagree with, but just don't follow at all. Or why would the same argument not mean that vegans should avoid soy milk, as that is largely used because it somewhat shares the taste and mouthfeel and use of milk, and also has a similar protein content?

I think kimny's answer helped me somewhat -- the line of thought must be that someone eating a plant-based product intended to taste like beef is mimicking the experience of "eating cow." Instead, I think they are enjoying an experience of eating a tasty food that is usually (but not necessarily) made from beef. And I would add that I don't think most meat eaters enjoy a burger because it is the experience of "eating cow." I think they mostly don't think much about where the food comes from and unless they are specifically eating food they hunted for themselves aren't likely to be thinking about the animal much at all, more the taste. They simply are okay with that taste (and the nutrients it comes with) being provided by the animal.

This is an interesting topic to me. My guess, just based on observations and experience, is that most people aren't actively thinking of the animal and experiencing pleasure specific to the action of eating them when they're eating meat. It's a pleasure of taste and texture, not a pleasure based on the actions that brought the animal to the state of being meat.

I think the exceptions would be hunters/farmers, who may feel pride/pleasure/pleasant associations with memories of the hunt or raising the animal (similar, perhaps, to how a gardener may feel when they're eating vegetables they grew themselves?) and maybe some people who have spiritual/mystical associations with the specific practice of consuming the body of someone who used to be alive (I've seen some people who are part of the "humane meat" community talk about quite specific pleasures of eating someone who they felt had a happier life than is usually given animals within the farming system).

Once you take this relatively small group of people out, I think there are people who enjoy meat and would even avoid faux meat due to concerns about processing/ingredients/unnaturalness, but still aren't actively focusing on how it all comes together.

When I ate meat, I certainly wouldn't have classified eating an individual animal as one of the pleasures of eating meat. It was simply something that had to happen so that I could eat meat, something that I thought was relatively inevitable. So once eating an animal was no longer acceptable to me, I had no problem with the opportunity to continue the "eating meat" part without the need to eat an animal.

I do think the argument that vegans should avoid meatlike products doesn't really make sense to me, given that we commonly eat foods that replicate milk, butter, cheese, etc. We also have a pretty widespread acceptance of things like portobello burgers. I guess my question for those who oppose faux meat on supposed ethical grounds would be "Where do you draw the line of what is 'too much' like an animal product to be okay?"

I relate to this. I don't typically think about what meat really is or where it comes from when I eat a burger or a ham sandwich or a fried egg and bacon. Like my story about the abandoned bird's egg, while I can't eat a runny yolk, I eat hard cooked eggs all the time. But I cannot bring myself to eat an entree that still looks like the animal, like a fish with it's head, or a whole pig that they actually carve in front of you. I eat cleaned shrimp, but am grossed out by crawfish with the heads still on. Like the Chinese duck in A Christmas Story, I can't eat it if it's looking at me! But my brain is habituated to thinking about a chicken cutlet or a steak as just disassociated "food", it just doesn't register for me. And I don't think that's all that unusual. I assume it's tied in to how separated many of us are from where our food comes from. It's what allows these industries to get away with the horrific practices they do. And it's not something I'm putting forward as a good thing, it's something I'm actively working to change in my thought process.

And I agree with @AnnPT77 that disagreeing with that "reasoning" is an odd choice of words. You don't choose what tastes you enjoy and which make you gag. They just do. You can choose not to eat something tasty for other reasons, just like you can choose to eat something that grosses you out because you are starving or to be polite. But you don't decide to like the taste of something.

I've known several people who don't like eating meat off the bone -- whether it's ribs or a fried chicken leg or whatever. They'll happily eat the same meat deboned, but eating it off the bone takes it out of the "food" category for them.

I was a relatively unbothered eater when I ate meat. I mean, there was stuff I didn't like the taste of, but there was little that really bothered me. I could eat, for example, a fish with a head. One thing I couldn't ever have done was eat something that was still alive (not a common practice in the West, but not unheard of in, say, Japan). It's something I couldn't ever have brought myself to try. I don't think the faux meat industry will ever make it that far into replicating culinary experiences!