Slashdot Mirror
Should Plant-Based Meat Replace Beef Completely? (pbs.org)
Long-time Slashdot reader tcd004 writes: Is beef still "what's for dinner?" Plant-based meat substitute startups say they could provide enough protein to feed the world using only 2% of the land on Earth, dramatically reducing the resources required to create beef products. And adopting plant-based burgers could help reduce heart disease, protect water resources, and stop deforestation. But Beef producers say no laboratory can beat a steer's ability to turn plant-based nutrition into tasty protein, and animals are the best source for natural fertilizer to grow crops. There's a coming war for your dinner plate. Who will prevail?
But so far there has NOT been a good substitute in terms of taste, texture, and nutritional value.
I'd pin my hopes on vat-grown beef before a plant-based option.
Meat is amensalism, at worst. Cannibalism is murder.
Give children plant-based meat, and they wouldn't like beef meat once they became an adult.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Plants are living things too, what makes you think that its ok to eat plants but not animals?
Some unjustifiable belief that animals are more important than plants?
I don't have the answer, but this is not it
Lots of people eat meat because it tastes good, not because of the protein.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Give children plant-based meat, and they wouldn't live lone enough to become an adult.
Fixed that for you. Humans require meat.
Absolutely if it is equal in taste and nutrition.
Impossible Burger and Beyond Burger are growing rapidly, and might well end up capturing huge amounts of the US beef market.
https://www.fooddive.com/news/impossible-burger-making-its-way-to-foodservice-venues/507812/
Eggs will likely be replaced by plant based artificial eggs in most of the food industry.
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/11/06/the-worlds-first-plant-based-egg-is-putting-the-egg-industry-in-a-panic/
Hopefully most stuff made of meat will be made from plant sources in the near future. The energy savings and positive environmental impact could be extraordinary.
The author wants us decide for the world what they should do.
How about those who want artificial beef eat that, and those who want genuine beef eat that.
Let's not make rules for others, because bit by bit it will erode our freedoms.
Whatever you do, please dont call your "plant based" beef "Soylent Beef". That brand name has some baggage.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
On average humans who eat beef with a quality and varied diet grow strong.
A generation of smart people who can study, do sport and who are on average healthy.
Consider a population over a generation who was on a more restricted diet?
Stunted, weak, effeminate, sick. Lacking in the nutrition to grow strong and to an average normal level given good nutrition.
Ensure your population gets good food. Beef, fruit, vegetables, clean water. Access to education and sport.
Why weaken and force a generation of healthy people into malnourishment if a nation has a normal food production system?
Go to a shop, buy some vegetables, fruit, some beef and enjoy a varied and balanced diet.
Farmers are able to and happy to fill shops with a wide variety of quality organic food and meat. Enjoy all kinds of different nutritious food without been told what to eat.
If a person wants to be vegetarian or reduce their beef consumption, great for them. Share the recipes and the lifestyle.
No need to change food laws and ban beef.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
People should eat what they want. They want beef, they pay for beef, they should get beef.
What kind of world asks people to accept a sad substitute for real food? Why should we all agree to lead impoverished lives, generation after generation, forever?
So we can go to environmentalist heaven? I'd rather not.
Nope, only some populations are genetically equipped for a vegetarian diet. For the rest, lack of meat causes brain shrinkage and mental disorders. And populations that originated from Europe tend to lack such genes -- and some, like the Inuit, are even more extreme.
That's vegetarian -- vegan diet is far more harmful. Especially for children, to the point of proposed bills that outlaw feeding children vegan.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Funny how the people who wail about GMO plants have no problem with FrankenMeat.
The meat needs to eat those plants :(
Meat is the most calorically efficient food on the planet. Does one suppose omnivores/carnivores evolved and spread so pervasively for no reason?
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
I've tried all the major brands and they all taste horrible. Why are they even trying? Nothing can match the real thing.
If you're satisfied by vegetables pretending to be meat, you must be one of those people who think sex robots can replace a real human woman. How pathetic!
Go ahead. Settle for second best, almost good enough, and substitutes. I won't.
A generation could be forced into developing nation malnourishment for some big gov enforced food fad.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Meat is the most calorically efficient food on the planet.
Look around at your fellow humans. Dense calories was a benefit in the stone age, not today. Even in poor countries, obesity is more common than hunger.
If meat is murder, then lions are mass murderers. Who will bring justice to the savanna?
If lions aren't evil, then no carnivore is evil.
"the Holy Gospel according to Luke:"
Who is gonna take any notice of what he said, after watching The Last Jedi
and he destroyed all the books
We are vastly underestimating our genetic predispositions and the depth of our senses if we think that everyone will ever be happy with meat that isn't meat.
This headline is a joke. If you think yes, then go ahead and eat your tofurky, but don't teach others what to eat.
But so far there has NOT been a good substitute in terms of taste, texture, and nutritional value.
I'd pin my hopes on vat-grown beef before a plant-based option.
Exactly. I question the ability to produce a lot of other nutrients beside just the meat proteins.
But reading the transcript, that was a 100 percent vegan mutual masturbation session. Worse than the people that come on and bleat about how awesome it is to eat insects
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
So for health reasons, I have had to change my diet. If you haven't tried this meat substitute, it is amazing....
Seven Grain Chicken Tenders
and you can get them at Target.
Even fast food is becoming plant based. As meat prices go UP UP UP and fast food prices stay at $1.99, they need to use filler in the meat. That filler is SOY bean, which incidentally, had the largest crop ever last year. Also, don't fear the SOY, you won't grow breasts or start singing alto.
Eat less meat, more plants. You will feel better, look better, and cut your cancer risk.
But so far there has NOT been a good substitute in terms of taste, texture, and nutritional value.
There is not (yet) a good substitute for beef, but fake chicken is pretty good.
You're not wrong. Yet, the relative length of time humans have been able to afford the fattening of their least hardy specimens is a mere blip on the timeline of their existence.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Not interested in your silly hairsplitting. A hungry man and a hungry lion have the same motive, they take the same action, they have the same guilt for their actions.
If a lion isn't evil for eating an animal, a man isn't.
I for one eat animal products because they provide complete proteins more readily and make it easy to consume lower calories. My focus is on protein intake and convenience. If there is a plant substitute, I would be all for it. I understand that I am in the minority though. I am one of those that are not wired to get a lot of excitement out of food. If it is cheap, nutritious and is versatile - I would take it. Meat should be an occasional indulgence, rather than staple.
Trouble is, things like this should cost little, but they often don't (I understand they don't have mass production advantages yet). I am puzzled on why plant based protein powders cost more than whey. I am also curious on how the gut flora react to these alternatives. My flora seem to do better on animal protein than plant protein.
I suppose you're right in a sense. Meat is murder. Tasty, tasty murder. Mmm..
I don't trust atoms -- they make up stuff.
You are outnumbered by vegetarian lifeforms.
Yes, the food that my food eats.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
"Plant based meat" is an oxymoron unless that's what we're calling grass fed beef now.
I was given a sample of an incredibly ok faux meat at whole foods a few months back. I don't remember the name of it, because, well, I eat real meat, but it was a very decent beef imitation, and if they can bring the cost down to less than real meat I could see myself eating faux-burgers from now own. (Unfortunately it was like 1.25 times the cost of actual ground beef FROM WHOLE FOODS, which is already an inflated meat price compared to other grocers)
Additionally, we only engage in coprophagia to correct digestive deficiencies.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Just remembered, it was called a Beyond Burger. And according to the googles it's actually a lot more expensive than I remembered, so fuck that. $12/lb is not a good price point for competing with beef, although I think it's probably tolerable for catering to the vegans.
$6/lb, sorry. I could have sworn there was an edit post button here back when...
* It is likely your last cucumber sandwich killed as many animals as your last hamburger.
* Humans were evolved to eat meat. To be fully vegetarian you would need a much longer digestive tract in which you could ferment plant matter like a gorilla or cow.
* Zinc, B12, and about a dozen other micro-nutrients that are NOT optional are hard to get for a vegetarian and impossible for a vegan. Popping a bunch of dietary supplements is a poor substitute and no way to live.
* There has never been a sustained human population that was fully vegetarian.
* The way we treat food animals is cruel, horrific and unconscionable. This is one area where the militant vegans and I see eye to eye. It has to stop.
* Cattle and other food animals can be easily raised on land that is not farmable. Too rocky too steep or soil where only grasses grow. The animal secretions help the ecosystem build more fertile topsoil. Other species live with cow pastures whereas plant agriculture tends toward monoculture where everything but the desired crop is poisoned and killed.
That's off the top of my head. I have a couple dozen more points but I am done for tonight.
I didn't say children eat only plant-based meat. Many ways to get proteins (tofu, Beans & Lentils. ...
Lowfat or Nonfat Dairy. ...
Fish & Shellfish. ...
Tofu & Other Soy Foods. ...
Nuts, Nut Butters & Seeds. ...
Pork Loin. ...
Eggs....)
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Panda: Habitat: Global
Global Zoos, you mean.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
So I'm a farmer, but I must confess that the beef producers are wrong about the natural fertilizer thing. The fact is that all food (human or animal) removes nutrients from the soil in which they grew. Cattle concentrate some nutrients in their manure which can be placed back on the land, but the nutrients that go into the beef itself end up in human waste products. If those are not recycled, they are removed from the farm land, and must be replaced with nutrients from another source, usually mined in the form of minerals like phosphate.
Either way you look at it, to get sustainable food production, we must recycling all organic waste, even human waste, back into farms and fields. If this loop is closed, then obviously plant-based proteins are going to be our best, most efficient bet.
I for one have no problem with replacing meat with plant proteins if we can get the taste and texture somewhat good. I'm in favor.
Most vegans i've met don't look healthy...
You should see their vegan pet wolf
Lions don't know better, nor do they have any other food options, being obligate carnivores with smallish brains and massive teeth and claws. Humans do know better and are not obligate carnivores.
Using a double standard to judge is unjust.
Even your grammar is incorrect. Meat is a physical object. Murder is an action. They cannot be equated.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
... Plant base diet is much more adapted for human...
Vitamin B12 says otherwise.
The diet requiring less supplementation (or ideally none at all), i.e. naturally providing all necessary nutrients, would logically be the one most adapted for humans.
Desktop site does preview, then a chance to post or edit.
Mobile does not.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
the benign and omniscient government officials know better, what you should eat
Ruling from atop their sacred food pyramid?
There are very good arguments that the state of our fellow humans today isn't due to available calories, it's due to the way we've messed with the form of those calories.
The drawback of plant-based substitute meat is that you have to put all your faith in corporate food engineering, and that industry has demonstrated on more than one occasion that they will not only take a casual attitude to towards the health of their customers, but will also actively cover up known concerns with their products.
Veganism/vegetarianism is a viable dietary strategy for humans, but it requires a lot more knowledge of nutrition in order to get all the amino acids we require than is required by just eating a steak every once in a while. It also has much less calories by volume than a diet with animal derived proteins and fats.
The only non-meat complete protein I can think of off the top of my head is the native American combo of corn beans and squash, and even with that the corn has to be nixtamalised in order to free niacin and prevent pellagra
Which is exactly the point being made, and needs explaining to those who call themselves vegetarians but still eat fish.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Judging can be though. A benevolent judge wouldn't condemn a hungry lion, doing what comes naturally to thrive and sustain himself and his family.
More plant matter -- like sugar. like holly berries. like cactus needles.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Replacing beef with plants will do *nothing* for the starving nations of the world, because we can already feed them three times over. Source.
World hunger is not a production problem, it is a distribution problem. It will not be solved by eliminating meat from anyone's diet.
Soyrizo, in my experience, makes a pretty good chorizo substitute. Too bad I only eat chorizo a few times a year, and my wife is Mexican American.
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
Cannibalism isn't necessarily murder either. For example, someone dies of natural causes and afterward their flesh is eaten.
AC South Africa had a working water and power system in the past.
Its not a beef problem.
Just support the water and power networks again and water will flow again as it did in the past.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Meat was outlawed and replaced by a plant based surrogate.
But according to the series due to production of methane which carries a high impact on global warming due to being 25 times as potent as CO2.
Next there are fusion powered atmospheric converters catching CO2 and producing O2 because mankind has reduced the forest and cut off that O2 source.
Ohh wait .. the swiss are going to trial that minus the fusion powered and O2 regeneration.
Obviously, but whoever said that what people choose to put in their own bodies is generally going to be determined by objective criteria in the first place?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
And you will be consumed by bacteria, which are now egging you on through your gut to eat more so you die soon and they can feast.
I read this transcript, and like most well meaning generalizations, it fails to provide specific actors other than "we", "us", "the United States" and "the rest of the world."
So no, in general, without a specific actor, plant-based meat should not replace beef. That is because:
1.) There is no such thing as plant based meat. It does not exist, despite how much anyone wants it to exist.
2.) For whom should this replacement apply? I think this should be up to individuals to decide. If the costs to the planet are so high, and there is sufficient military might to enforce a global beef curtailing, then this costs should be reflected in the costs of beef. Then, if someone wants to pay actual (not externalities) then these costs should be reflected in the cost of beef. This is my opinion.
Good luck setting up your global government to enforce these price controls, or unspecified bans on beef. This is 100% impractical.
The proper term is pescatarian.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Nope, only some populations are genetically equipped for a vegetarian diet. For the rest, lack of meat causes brain shrinkage and mental disorders.
This. There is a long out of print book by Mark Vonnegut called "The Eden Express" Mark suffered from Schizophrenia in the early 1970's, and much of his problems were based on a vegetarian diet. After stabilizing him with Thorazine and shock treatments, he went on a normal diet, and with vitamin supplements, became a normal productive person.
I tried vegatarianism in the early 1980's, and while I didn't go any crazier than I am now, it severely fucked up my digestive system. Fortunately, going back to a normal diet reset my intestinal flora.
That's vegetarian -- vegan diet is far more harmful.
I have always thought that a vegan starts out with trying to define everything in life as good or bad (this is a bad thing to do, and leads to bad mental outcomes) So they embark on a journey to try to ensure that everything they do is good.
Killing animals is bad, especially the cute ones, so eating their "corpse meat" is likewise bad. So they stop. That Chicken didn't give you permission to eat it's eggs, or that cow it's milk or the honey we callously steal from the innocent bees. So that is verboten.
So they embark on this completely irrational and artificial and un-natural diet of only things they have determined are ethically "good".
My reply to them is that just who are they to set themselves up as arbiter of what is good and bad.
All life is precious, from the lowest bacteria to yeasts, to plants, to animals. And unless a human being somehow becomes a chemoautotroph, and can surgive by directly taking minerals and digesting them, the human does not live unless the human kills another life form. No way around it. The vegan is no less a killer than the meat eaters they consider below them.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Personally I don't eat meat any more but you just have to look at the trends of the last few decades and the increasing availability of cheap mass farmed meats and the death of the traditional butcher shop to see the impact our current eating habits have on us. If we returned to meat being more of a treat we would be a lot healthier than we are but the meat industry has convinced everyone that they must eat far more meat than they actually should and worse, they have scaled up production to appalling levels inflicting terrible short lives on the animals people are eating.
I visited the USDA-MARC in Nebraska some years back and they are busy breeding animals to produce more meat with less food input and in shorter time because that's what the farmers want. The product of this intensive farming doesn't taste good compared with grass fed animals but people want (or have been convinced they want) a lot of cheap meat. Whatever technology can do to improve our diets and reduce the mistreatment of animals has got to be good. I wouldn't go so far as saying people can't eat meat, but I have to say that the amount of abuse I get from people who do eat it because I won't shows that they clearly know they're the ones on the wrong side of the fence.
"I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
Honey garlic venison sausages. Absolutely divine.
There MIGHT be a point. Unfortunately that's not the case.
Meat, in it's various animal forms, provides nutrients beyond just protein.
For those interested in a somewhat thick read, have a look at The Big Fat Surprise by Nina Teicholz
There's grass-fed beef. It won't satisfy people who don't eat meat for ethical reasons, but it does have less environmental impact than feedlot fattened beef.
On the other hand it's leaner, and the flavor is different and takes some getting used to. It also take somewhat more land to grow a set number of pounds of beef -- although that land isn't cultivated. Also the USDA has stopped attempting to police the term "grass fed" so you can't quite be sure whether you're actually getting grass-finished beef now. All beef cattle forage for grass at some point in their lives so you could be getting anything.
That means going with meat from a local farmer -- which is terrific in terms of quality and environmental impact, but costs a lot more on a per-pound basis.
On the other other hand consuming less of higher quality meat is probably a good thing. You don't really need that much protein. Practically everyone could probably manage an upgrade in culinary quality, healthiness and environmental impact at the same time, but it would take some thought and adjustment.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I say we start eating the PETA activists and Vegans! :-D
Then what was in the drawer on the Millenium Falcon?
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Click bait. Release the hounds.
Plant-based meat? Ok. Synthetic meat? Why not.
But I am never, ever, touching patties made from insect meat, no matter how many "grasshoppers are the next big superfood!" articles are written.
Never gonna forget that scene from Snowpiercer. No. Thanks.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
Hey man how about you stop ridiculing people that like insects and instead maybe bother to TRY ONE.
I've tried bees, ants, grasshoppers and larvae. Neither is something I'd want to eat again, unless it's to be polite. There's an earthy bitter taste I just can't bring myself to like, any more than I can like green tea or broccoli. I'll eat it if hungry enough, but it's not enjoyable for me.
Give me meat, and preferably heart, bone marrow and liver. Tastes and textures that make me salivate. Insects just don't do that.
The article presents a false premise. Chains like sonic are now offering burgers that blend beef and mushroom to improve health and still taste good (well, for some value of good. I guess Sonic isn't the epitome of gourmet.) It seems quite reasonable that we should be able to come up with a plant-based product close enough to beef that we can blend it in burgers in a way that is either unnoticeable or actually improves the flavor. We don't really need to get to 100% in order to have significant impact.
All life is precious you insensitive clod, and you do not live unless you kill something. Plant? You killed, animal? You killed it.
Jains only eat parts of plants that can be harvested without killing the plant.
I can't eat grass though, so converting grass into cow at a 10% efficiency is far still better than the 0% efficiency you get from, say, licking a lawnmower blade. There's lots of land that's suitable for growing grass and not much else. Why not raise herds of cattle on it? Tasty, renewable, full of calories and nutrients!
Pandas are going extinct because of their preference for bamboo. Intervention by humans is only delaying the their eventual demise.
-- Will program for bandwidth
The quality of meat in many parts of the world is quite poor. Meat in China is not high quality, and they eat parts of the animal that westerners wouldn't like the feet of chickens. They have a choice, they just like eating that stuff, probably because the body meat isn't great quality anyway.
So plant grown meat could actually be a nice upgrade for a lot of people. Could also be good for feeding animals like pets.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
At the headquarters of Denali National Park, there is an exhibit on caribou. They do not have an easy life. Four fifth of the calves never make it to adulthood, mostly falling to predators who rip them apart and eat them alive. The survivors are plagued by swarms of biting flies and parasites that burrow tunnels in their haunches before they are weakened by age or disease, and ripped apart by a predator.
This contrasts with responsibly raised farm animals, who have room, board, and medical care, live much longer than their cousins in the wild. They certainly die more humanely than being eaten alive, in fact they die more humanely than most of us do hooked up to machines.
I grew up in the country and saw how wild animals lived. I suspect that most animal rights people’s experience with animals is limited to dog, cats, and zoos.
While on a bus at Denali, we saw a fox walk by with a bloody squirrel dripping from his jaws This was a revelation to my wife who was raised in a genteel suburb. From the oohs and aahs it caused it seemed to be a revelation to most of the passengers.
While I certainly back humane treatment of captive animals,. I think at the further end, animal rights people, isolated from nature, are projecting their human selves on animals.
...right about the time my penis becomes the standard replacement for women's vibrators.
IOW, never.
Next topic.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
How can vegetarianism persist in India?
You do know that vitamin deficiency is a big problem in India, right?
https://timesofindia.indiatime...
Panda also sleep for long periods and when they move they move really slowly. The food they eat would not sustain a fast metabolism.
Human vegans too.
They are slow as molasses
and stink up the loo.
You could turn that question around and interest more people:
Should vegans go away and stop bothering meat eaters completely?
Every dog and cat I've owned LOVED milk when they could get it. They have problems with milking the damn cows though.
Jains only eat parts of plants that can be harvested without killing the plant.
You can be just as humane with animals - just eat parts that can be harvested without killing the animal. Have you never wondered where all those one-legged chicken come from?
There's a coming war for my dinner plate?
No, there really isn't. I'm from Alberta. I like my beef slapped on the ass and tossed on my plate, preferably still mooing. If it's cow farts that are going to destroy the earth, just let the end come. I'll be sitting down to my seasoned and seared pound and a half prime rib dinner when it arrives.
Well, lets just ignore the moral questions about eating meat for a moment. There is a bigger problem that will likely decide the issue. It takes quite a bit of grain and water to raise animals for food. This isn't a big deal when you have 100 million people on the planet, but it gets to be a problem when the world population climbs towards the 10 billion plus mark.
Assuming that moral views of meat doesn't change, and that science doesn't invent a way to just grow protein in a vat using only sunlight, the cost of the resources required to grow the animals will likely put a hamburger out of reach for a lot of people. So, change is coming one way or another.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
A good ground patty is easier than a steak. For small pieces extrusion techniques can somewhat emulate muscle fibers, mostly used to emulate chicken chunks, but that doesn't work for larger pieces.
There is nothing magical about meat, it's just chemicals. I doubt there is any nutritionally useful chemical in meat we can't already mass produce cheaply.
Stuff like Coenzyme Q10, hydroxocobalamin (B12 as it occurs in meat), L-carnosine, Taurine etc. are not common in vegan diets ... but you can just fortify the food.
It's not just the amino acids. There's a whole bunch of stuff in animal products that are lacking in plants. Vitamin B12 is the major example, but also vitamin D and EHA/DHA oils.
Dogs can probably tear open the udders.
Do you really trust the big food industry to make stuff that's actually healthy, instead of food that mostly feeds their bottom line ?
There is no plant-based 'meat' of 'beef', etc.
Meat, beef, chicken, fish, and any other (edible) animal based food product contains essential amino-acids that you cannot easily get from plant-based substitutes. Scrapping these food stuffs from your diet means a lifetime of taking supplements for the essential chemical ingredients of your own body you are then missing out on.
And on the Eighth Day, Man created God.
As someone with both Celiac disease and Iron-based Anemia I'll stick to my High Beef/Meat diet... Until a GOOD meat replacement comes along thats Wheat/Gluten free and emulates all the nutrients/properties of Beef then its still no bueno!
To say nothing of the unknown long-term consequences. The food scientists SWEAR they'll get it right this time around. Just forget about their utter cockup on transfat in the 60s, sugar in the 70s (Fuck You, Ancel Keys), HFCS in the 80s, eggs-are-death in the 90s, millions of tons of roundup soaking our consumed grains from 2000 onwards (seriously, look at how much growth glyphosate use has had in the last 20 years, including use immediately before harvest to dry the crop). Oh, and just about ALL of this (the push towards veganism included) is tied to the fertilizer industry - otherwise known as the nitrogen-fixation arm of the military-industrial complex.
Food science has always been political and profit-motivated. There is NOTHING in these assholes' agendas about long-term health for a population. The peons are most profitable when they die immediately after retirement or slightly before.
Look around at your fellow humans. Dense calories was a benefit in the stone age, not today. Even in poor countries, obesity is more common than hunger.
Obesity can be blamed almost entirely on carbohydrates.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
They can call it "Soylent". And I'm sure it wouldn't take much thought to come up with a colour scheme so consumers could quickly and conveniently identify the various varieties.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Most plants do not have nervous systems. So group them in the same basket with bacteria and fungi. They cannot feel anything as they die so are of little importance.
And you know that a nervous system is the only way for a living organism to experience pain how? Plants evolve to suit their environment just as animals due. The sweet smell of a freshly mown yard is their cry for help.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Vegetarianism is not veganism.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
A poor memory is a sign of Soy Boy Syndrome and B12 deficiency.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Choice between sfomey grilled insects and 'real meat' obviously leads to eating both.
Ever eat prawns or shrimps? Most insects taste in the middle between sea food and nuts, grilled nuts. In otrqhero words: they don't even compare with most meats.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.
"Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's"
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
No offense, but when people don't like Broccoli (or insert hate vegetable here) I really wonder what is wrong with their tongues.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
We need to consume the animals souls too, in order to revivify our life force. Kind of like space vampires need to do with humans.
It's why most human religious festivals require the death of animals and the consumption of their flesh, for example turkey at Christmas.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
But girl friends you win.
Hint: you can put stripes of a steak, chicken, trout, salmon, cheese etc. on top of a salad.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Why do we need high energy density foods? Outside of disaster relief situations.
Or a bulking agent.
Fake-meat does not taste quite as nice as real-meat. But what about, say, a mince that is 25% meat and 75% meat substitute?
Global warming might be solved by eliminating meat from people's diets, though. The carbon emissions of meat and especially of beef are extremely high compared to plant food, as is the land use. I eat meat because it tastes better and is cheap -- but perhaps it would be a good idea to tax meat for the external effects it has.
This space intentionally left blank
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There's no need for total vegetarianism. Almost everyone in the developed world - which is fast becoming a lot more of the world than it once was - eats far more meat than is required to maintain health. Just cut it back.
Or you can just eat a bit of meat. Cut back without completely cutting out.
I like broccoli when I manage to give them some taste. They are very taste-resistent.
No, it is not.
Read a book about it.
First of all, meat only has half the calories per weight than carbs or fat.
Secondly, to yield a certain amount of calories via meat, you have to feed the animal ten times as much food, that is mot efficient in any meaningfull way.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
no
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
Just because you consider non-humans to be lesser beings doesn't mean you haven't taken the life of another living and feeling creature and prematurely ended it for your own personal pleasures.
Once upon a time it was considered acceptable to kill beasts en mass in order to make fur coats. Today it is considered inhumane and cruel. How much longer do you think society will go before your killing of beasts is considered inhumane and cruel?
You are killing a living orgasm just to have something that is pleasurable to eat.
I cant speak for the rest of you, but I’d take the living orgasm over the tasty food, any day of the week.
#DeleteChrome
I'll eat meat if I damned well please. Your approval is neither sought nor required.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
It was, but more to the point of does it taste like the meat it replaces or not? If not, then whether it presents a nutritional substitute or not is irrelevant.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
How many pests are killed to protect that plant from getting eaten from non humans. Organic pesticides and bringing/raising predatory animals to protect the crops kills thousands/millions of animals to keep that bean alive so you can eat it.
As an animal who cannot photosynthesis or extract nutrients from minerals, our lives are dependent on killing others for our nutrient. Our ancestors knew this that had to deal with it every day. Today a lot of the details of our food preparation and a culture afraid to face death in any form makes it seem like we can have a our cake without having cost the lives of thousands of animals.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Amen-salism is where you say a little prayer before you kill it and eat it.
Why do we need high energy density foods? Outside of disaster relief situations.
We don't, for the most part, in the food wealthy first-world.
Neither do we need the leftover evolutionary penchant for sweets that survives in us from when eating the ripest fruits was an evolutionary advantage for our primate ancestors... because the sweetest fruits pack the most caloric energy.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
No, it is not. Read a book about it. First of all, meat only has half the calories per weight than carbs or fat. Secondly, to yield a certain amount of calories via meat, you have to feed the animal ten times as much food, that is mot efficient in any meaningfull way.
Where do you source your calorically dense fat?
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
And you will be consumed by bacteria, which are now egging you on through your gut to eat more so you die soon and they can feast.
Unless there's some truth that we, and all animals, live symbiotically as a host for these microorganisms.
In a mutualistic relationship, both the bacteria and the host benefit. For example, there are several kinds of bacteria that live on the skin and inside the mouth, nose, throat, and intestines of humans and animals. These bacteria receive a place to live and feed while keeping other harmful microbes from taking up residence. Bacteria in the digestive system assist in nutrient metabolism, vitamin production, and waste processing. They also aid in the host's immune system response to pathogenic bacteria.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
I find your comment cold, sarcastic, and frigidly chilling. How does one get a point across to someone as clothesminded as you?
Clearly, you come bearing the the gift of a nice suit, preferably from Savile Row.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
Agriculture is only responsible for 10-15% of GHG emissions, and meat is only a portion of that.
F**K NO! Are you INSANE?
Let's work on not killing each other first 'K? In the mean time I am eating meat. We are after all omnivores.
I'd go plant based in a heartbeat. Also, I kinda like animals.
1) In developed nations, over-nutrition is a *far* greater problem than under nutrition. Obesity, heart disease, diabetes, colon cancer, and other such maladies are far greater problems than anything caused by under nutriment.
2) In developed nations, lack of fibre is far more common than lack of protein.
3) Supplements cost a few pennies a day. Many meat eaters also suffer from various vitamin deficiencies.
4) Numerous scientific studies prove that a properly managed vegan diet is, at least, adequate, if not superior.
5) Some organizations that advocate a vegan diet include: American Diabetes Association, World Health Organization, American Dietetic Association, British Dietetic Association, and the American Heart Association. Dr. Kim Williams, president of the American College of Cardiology and chief of cardiology at Rush University, advocates a plant-based diet for heart disease prevention.
6) Several world-class athletes are vegans.
Just curious: how do you think vegans impose their life style on you? Did somebody point a gun at head?
... Should Plant-Based Meat Replace Beef Completely? ...
Maybe at some point plant protein will replace animal protein, or maybe not. Whether or not it"should" happen is up to those who consume the animal based protein.
About 99% of the meat consumed in the US is from factory farms.
The quality of meat in many parts of the world is quite poor. Meat in China is not high quality, and they eat parts of the animal that westerners wouldn't like the feet of chickens
Actually, eating that meat is better for you than purely muscle meat. See for example cat food: manufacturers add bone ash to it to avoid nutritional deficiencies. Natural cat food (ie, a tit or a mouse) gets eaten whole (save for biggest flight feathers): bones, guts, connective tissue, plumage, beak -- everything, this includes substances absent or scarce in regular meat.
Thus, Chinese meat-eating diet is better than ours.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Indeed - I actually prefer it to the greasy mess that is normal chorizo. If you're looking for excuses to eat it, I find it quite tasty fried up and poured into a waffle iron before adding the batter.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
There's no silver bullets, but there are a lot of different sectors that have a 10-20% contribution. If we can halve several of them we'll be well on our way to solving the problem. Or at least buying enough time to come up with more thorough solutions.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Are there carnivorous bears? Other than the polar bears, who live in a basically plant-free environment at least? Everything I've heard is that bears are mostly plant-heavy omnivores whose diets are primarily fruits, nuts, and insects. Though they're also opportunistic predators and not above scavenging.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Can't say I trust the agricultural industry either. Your average chunk of limp, fatty beef/pork/chicken/etc. would be barely recognizable as meat to our ancestors of a few centuries ago. Ditto most of our modern flavorless, low-nutrient fruits and vegetables.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
I know many vegetarians and vegans, and the seem to be absolutely fine, and hold down responsible jobs requiring application of higher thinking skills, despite being vegetarians or vegans for decades. I'd want to see better evidence for the claims than a newspaper article and one anecdote.
Something stopping you?
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Depends on your goals...
If your goal is to create centralized, industrialized, Big Ag food then plant based pseudo meat works great.
If your goal is decentralized, small farm, local economies then pasture based grazing animal based real meat works great.
Frankly, there is no need to call plant based foods meat - that is deception. Call them what they are: Highly processed plant based foods.
I'll take the real thing any day.
Longtime vegan here. You don't know what you are talking about at all.
That is the response one would get from a vegan. Being insulted and at base, condescending. Yet managing to miss the point by fixating on your trigger words.
Eliminating meat from the diet is very bad for some people. This is not open for debate except by people who somehow trump reality with their opinion. Some people actually go insane. In my case, I merely wrecked my digestive system for a year by going lacto-ovarian.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
So, you're saying All Lives Matter then?
Matter matters.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Should beef-based plants replace vegetarian meals?
birth rates are dropping in pretty much every first world nation. Usually well below sustainability. It's become clear that, given options, people will control the population just fine. The birth rate stays high in poor countries because children are basically their retirement plan.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Right. Because they never keep cows in sheds/pens and feed them corn.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Meat is the most calorically efficient food on the planet.
Incorrect; fructose has been shown to be far more efficient of a fuel source for the human metabolism than fat or protein.
Stranger in Strange Land was not a how-to guide.
Funny how different people all get lumped into the same categories by morons who can't help but oversimplify everything in their futile attempts to understand the world.
We are after all omnivores.
Sure, based on our behavior but certainly not our biology; anyone who's actually studied human morphology - and compared it to that of an actual omnivore - can see that humans posses lengthy digestive tracts that are clearly optimized for fruits, shoots and roots.
But gone on and eat your burgers; life's already short; shorten it some more. ;)
He wouldnâ(TM)t have made them out of meat.
Choice between sfomey grilled insects and 'real meat' obviously leads to eating both. Ever eat prawns or shrimps? Most insects taste in the middle between sea food and nuts, grilled nuts. In otrqhero words: they don't even compare with most meats.
Might as well get it out of the way - everyone eats insects at some point. If we eat grain products, we are getting a certain amount of insect matter. There is an allowable amount of every manner of matter including fecal matter.
As for Prawns/shrimp, sure. I love them boiled in beer and Old Bay seasoning. Or sauteed in butter or garlic. And Lobster too. But they have meat on them. Identifiable meat.
Now we return to the insects. I devein shrimp. Deveining is a nice word for removing the instestinal tract. That is fecal matter I'm removing. I eat the tails and claws on a lobster. But when we eat crickets or grubs, or whatever insect suits one's fancy, we are consuming their excrement as well as whatever protein they posesss. Note that this is partially acknowledged by the practice of feeding escargot snails cabbage for a short time before they are eaten. But cabbage manure is still manure.
Me? No thanks. I'm just not a person who purposely eats shit.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
In other words, Soylent Green is people.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Beef producers say no laboratory can beat a steer's ability to turn plant-based nutrition into tasty [emphasis added] protein
Remove the word "tasty" - which, needless to say, is highly subjective - and you have a pants-on-fire-class false statement. Beef is consistently ranked near the bottom of charts of "acres of land per (g of protein / year)" and "carbon footprint / g of protein", below other animal-based protein sources, which in turn are ranked below plant-based protein sources. As would be expected based on basic bio-energetical considerations.
This is basically a falsehood turned into a non-falsifiable statement by the addition of a weasel word that will be overlooked by most readers. FUD production 101.
Posted anonymously to preserve moderation.
What you're avoiding is that some animals have nervous systems and cognition. If you respect intelligence and sentience, that should be protected. Cows are not stupid. Pigs are quite smart. Plants have basically nothing going on beyond failure sensors. Comparing all as if equal is really dumb, in my view.
So you will eat anything that isn't sentient? You just fell into the trap that has vegans arguing about whether oysters are vegan or not.
https://www.thekitchn.com/what...
I make my decisions on what to eat by what my body was designed to eat. Humans are by nature omnivores. That some would adopt a prey diet, and try to justify it on ethical grounds is just another inconsistency in their logic. Is a vulture evil? Is a lion or other frank carnivore evil? Is a horse or Pika good because they eat only vegetation? Humans are a part of nature. We do have the ability to choose to harvest the meat that we eat in as humane way as possible, which I wholeheartedly believe in.
But we are still omnivores.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Because people arguing about it need to create a false dichotomy of one of the other.... same thing with politics and computers and just about everything.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
All those frogs on crutches. It is definitely cruel.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
I like broccoli and spinach, but green beans literally make me want to vomit (and I have vomited, being forced to eat green beans by my mom at one point). I am not kidding.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
He probably also believes that you can get milk from soybeans! It's soy JUICE - not soy milk!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Feedlots where cattle are knee deep in their own shit and get so sick they have to be picked up by forklifts, pigs are raised in "gestational crates" so tight they cannot turn around, chickens that trample each other to death before being violently thrown into cages by farm hands.
The overwhelming majority of U.S. meat is raised on such farms, not living in an Amish free range paradise.
Even at the cost of destroying land, generating large amounts of a powerful greenhouse gas, draining aquifers in arid areas to give them water, packing them so tightly in factory farms they're knee deep in their own waste - what isn't there for a conservative to love here?
fructose has been shown to be far more efficient of a fuel source for the human metabolism than fat or protein.
Most cells in your body cannot metabolize fructose. Instead, it goes to the liver first, and excess amounts of fructose (typical for a highly refined junk western diet) lead to hypertriglyceridemia, and fat deposits inside the liver tissue itself (non-alcoholic fatty liver disease).
WYP? A hamburger at Arby's will taste different from a hamburger from Jack in the Box. The point is to try it and see....if you can stop being a doosh long enough to do so.
...it's normal for the plains of America, at least, to be covered with 65 million buffalo. While that state wouldn't produce nearly as much meat as is consumed today, you wouldn't have to substitute entirely.
Why, when we've been overproducing carbon dioxide since the industrial revolution? And the carbon taken out of the air would just be carbon again on the topsoil - it's not sequestering it deep underground to replace all the oil and coal that has been burned.
I don't know which is worse, genetically modified plants or anti-biotic / hormone infused maltreated animals.
It's kind of a " damned if you do, damned if you don't " thing :|
Betteridge's law of headlines
Should headlines beginning with the word "should" be also included?
Appropriate stock answer:
Yes, of course, if there's still enough room on your stone tablet.
Note: I said, "responsibly raised". I am aware of the horrors of factory farming, I eat little meat, and when I do, I look at the sourcing.
Fuck it it up its stupid ass. The "free market" caused the Dust Bowl, is draining aquifers in arid areas that will take thousands of years to refill, drove the dodo bird and passenger pigeon to extinction, and would do the same to bluefin tuna, rhinos, elephants, tigers and manatees.
Fuck the free market.
There are plenty of reasons to reduce beef production that don't have anything to do with hippies, vegans or PETA. Cattle cause damage to the land, take enormous amounts of food and water to raise (draining aquifers in arid areas like California), produce a powerful greenhouse gas and are raised in brutal factory farms where they walk knee deep in their own waste and carried by forklifts to processing when they are too sick to even walk.
humans posses lengthy digestive tracts that are clearly optimized for fruits, shoots and roots.
Chimps eat a lot of fruit and shoots. Their colon (where they ferment plant matter) is about twice our size, and their long intestine is about half our size (where we digest meat).
Meat is murder and must be abolished.
Eating unnatural foods is murder. Look at all the damage unnatural and plant based fats have done in the Western diet, leading to oxidized LDL and the associated heart disease and cancers.
Lard and tallow and chickens and beef and pork and fish and escargo for me, consistent with healthier ratios of saturated and unsaturated fats.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Uh huh. Then you know that farm animals do not have it better than wild ones, which was the point of your post. Not when the "responsibly raised" livestock make up a small fraction of the market.
A family of wild pigs where one in six piglets survives to adulthood have it much better off than a family born in gestational crates, where they can't socialize or clean themselves, much less turn around.
That picture is one of a destination point, not a rear-pen. You can tell because there's absolutely nothing there for maintenance, not even your corn. What were you trying to prove with a shot of a stockyards outside of say, a slaughterhouse?
Soylent Green is the most popular because it tastes better than the plankton-based Soylent Red and Soylent Yellow.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Here's the morphology of chimp, orang and human.
According to your hypotheses, chimps are greater consumers of meat than we are. This is not the case.
Explain why orangutans have a long intestine as long as ours.
Bad title -- sorry.
No, it is not. You're just projecting your desires.
You equate chopping up a blood relative to chopping up an animal for food?
Then you'll probably want to eat less animal meat.
However you may miss the taste of meat. The good news is that these days there are some very very good substitutes. I have often thought about performing a blind taste on some meat eaters to see if they could tell the difference between say a soya sausage and a meat sausage.
Why not try it for yourself? Wouldn't it be wonderful to discover that you can replace some of your animal based meat (or all of it? :-) with plant based substitutes and not notice any real difference to your eating pleasure.
Cleerline
Not terribly sure that local farm beef is all that much more expensive. I have a friend that runs 10 to 20 head of cattle on a small farm as a side thing. Me and my family dont eat a lot of red meat, but we generally get a quarter cow off of him every year which comes to about 100-125lbs of processed meat. After paying him, then the butcher to process it, we generally pay a little over $6/lb. Granted I can get ground meat for about $2/lb in the grocery store but I am paying about $6/lb for a good joint or roast at the grocery store adnd far more than that for high quality cuts and steaks. I get over half of my processed meat in the form of joints and steaks, plus they throw in the bones for me so I can make stock. It is not as expensive as most people think and it is better for the environment to go local.
News flash.
Animals don't make proteins. All protein comes from plants.
Animals are just a very inefficient mechanism of converting plant protein to unhealthy animal protein.
Better to eat lower on the food chain. Fewer toxins, no saturated fat, Better for the planet.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Actually, my daughter was just telling about eating stone crabs in Florida. Apparently, the only harvest one claw of the crab, throw it back and it grows a new one. (Rinse, repeat)
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
B12 doesn't say otherwise. We used to get our B12 from eating plants with dirt on them and drinking from streams, lakes, etc...
Now we sterilize everything killing the bacteria that produces B12.
We also supplement the diets of the animals so they get their B12 because most anumals come from facroy farms and are pumped with antibiotics. So you are supplementing just once removed, the downside is you get all the bad(excess fat, cholesterol, growth hormones, etc.. ) when you eat animal products to get your B12.
My wife's definition of "enough food for dinner" is what I call "hors d'oeuvres". Are we talking a minimalist 1200 calorie diet that only feeds fashion models, or enough for a football player?
Explain why do they have a longer small intestine than chimps, if they eat similar diets.
Fixed that for you. Humans require meat. Nope. There's nothing in meat a human needs. Other than good PR. In fact, when it comes to your health, eating meat reduces your life expectancy if anything.
The Eco balance of meat is orders of magnitude worse than the worst mono-agriculture. If we can replace meat with plant, we sold. ASAP.
I'm not even taking about animal mistreatment and, even worse, the abolishment of anti-biotics by abuse by the meat industry.
Live stock meat is bad. Very bad in many ways. We should get rid of 99% of it.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Whether by causation, co-evolution, or correlation, every great tech leap forward came with a corresponding food revolution.
Mastery of fire, or at least some control over it, brought cooking, giving our protohuman ancestors the meal ticket to the tougher meats and plant fibers that previously were thrown away or pooped as indigestible (a literally fiber-rich diet). Agriculture brought on the eating of grass and, coupled with the by then already ancient technology of cooking, the fine art of baking or the making of what is basically edible clay: bread, cakes and their fluffy, crumbly, crunchy and spongy allies. In the modern era, who hasn't, at some point in their lives, consumed the junk and fast food churned out by the Industrial Revolution and the subsequent development of mass production?
Following this pattern, there's no doubt that any tech Singularity will be not just a much ballyhooed AI singularity but a dinner plate singularity as well. We or our immediate descendants will become regular consumers of food that, while they may already exist in some preliminary or experimental form, haven't even gone under the noses of most humans alive today. And the surprising thing is most likely dinner would be served just like the the steak and fried chickens we already eat, but produced through the wonders of truly Frankensteinian bioengineering.
No, I'm not talking about converting plant fibers into meat as the summary and the vegan pornoganda appear to imply, but the growing of the meat without the chemical and thermal energy hogs that come along with it. That is, animal tissues grown in an oversized Petri dish stuffed with all the necessary ingredients for them to grow to a form and size big enough and ready to be cut, if not butchered, seasoned, then roasted or fried and served on a dinner plate as nature identical steak. Or maybe nearly identical, with much of the bad cholesterol engineered out or replaced with the supposedly good cholesterol of aqua based animals.
If you have stocks in a cattle or chicken raising company, sell out now, while you still have a healthy profit margin. Natural meats are going to be replaced faster than e-cigarettes will displace tobacco.
Now if you're heavily invested in the food industry, your options boil down to a choice between the increasingly vegan whole foods companies being gobbled up by the likes of Amazon, or the traditional meat processing companies, which can easily shift from producing ham and hamburgers with inputs sourced from creatures that eat hormones and GMOs to meat derived from headless and gutless animal zombies fed a steady cocktail of who knows yet what set of micronutrients.
Yes, in the future non-paleo meat lovers will have to content themselves with eating lab grown meat. That or they will have to suffer the indignity of meat made out of plant cells. But there's no way traditional animal agriculture can flourish in the new anti-greenhouse gases regime. Now that there's an active movement trying to link meat production to climate change in particular and unsustainable development in general. Cattle farming will become the new coal industry, set to soon collapse both from pressure from the ecozealots and from competition by the Frankenfood industry. Let's just hope somebody opensources or leaks the essential gentech needed to grow headless pork bellies and chicken wings.
Well that's enough of my Slashrant for the hour. Be back after my Big Meal of the Day.
There's a youtube video out there of a grizzly killing a moose and eating its heart, in some guy's driveway. There's another image of a badly burned buffalo fleeing from a grizzly (buffalo fell into a geyser apparently - was put down by park rangers). Another of a grizzly attacking musk oxen calves. Pretty sure that species is heavily carnivorous.
I've read that ancient Greeks ate meat only during festivities. The reasoning from our perspective is that was not only good for them but also for the animals -- giving the animal population time to recover.
Another interesting heuristics is that Crusaders, for all their wearing and use of heavy armor, were told by the Church to eat meat of warm blooded animals (such as wild game) only two meals a week. Fish was permitted more often so reportedly they started the process of cultivating fish for eating in ponds.
Yes, because one should obviously trust Lance Armstrong's foundation on "no extra drugs, really!"...
Crickets are as good a protein source as beef and require practically no water to raise. They are sold in the form of flour that you can make into power bars and the like.
News flash. Animals don't make proteins. All protein comes from plants. Animals are just a very inefficient mechanism of converting plant protein to unhealthy animal protein. Better to eat lower on the food chain. Fewer toxins, no saturated fat, Better for the planet.
Yet somehow, some way, in a miracle of nature, humans have survived to this point while apparently eating the exact wrong things. Only now do we know enopuight that the metabolism that nature has provided us with is wrong, evil, and utterly unhealthy and perhaps nature wants humans to destroy the planet? The only reason that humans living and eating the very substances that they evolved to eat is is any sustainability problem, isbecause ther are too gawddamned many of us. In no time during the evolution of humans did the world end, eh? If we manage to destroy the planet, about the least likely mechanism is eating meat.
And eating too much meat can be a problem, just as eating too much carbs, and excessive phytoestrogens. It is not an indictment od either. In fact, the superseded food guidelines in the US were heavily influenced by vegans and the good old American values of industry influence.
In addition, there are interesting problems for men in the phytoestrogen loaded "correct" diet of today. http://www.lifeextension.com/M...
If you wish to eat like a prey animal and load up your body with estrogens, by all means do. I'll balance out my diet with meat, complex carbs but watch the phytoestrogen containers - if they brag about anti-oxidant properties, its probably got them in spades - and limit my simple carbs.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
*It is likely your last cucumber sandwich killed as many animals as your last hamburger.
You need to stop sacrificing cows to your harvest god.
Rather than "killed as many animals," I think you mean "used as much resources." Cucumbers are somewhat resource-intensive to grow compared to other vegetables.
*Humans were evolved to eat meat.
3%-8% of the average chimp diet comes from meat. Chimpanzees are mostly frugivores.
Do we say "Hummingbird's were evolved to to eat meat?" No, we mostly think of hummingbirds as nectivores, as their main diet is nectar. Only 90% of the hummingbird diet is nectar though and they hunt insects like chimpanzees hunt monkeys.
*To be fully vegetarian you would need a much longer digestive tract in which you could ferment plant matter like a gorilla or cow.
Humans began as frugivores, not grazers. If a hummingbird stopped eating insects would it need a long digestive tract to be vegetarian? No.
*There has never been a sustained human population that was fully vegetarian.
Four people in a house who are vegetation can be a sustained human population. Various human social groups throughout history have also adopted a vegetarian lifestyle.
*The way we treat food animals is cruel, horrific and unconscionable. This is one area where the militant vegans and I see eye to eye. It has to stop.
The way we treat food animals is cruel, horrific and unconscionable. This is one area where the militant vegans and I see eye to eye. It has to stop.
Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
I agree. When I cannot tell the difference between a top quality sirloin steak and a plant based substitute, then MAYBE we should think about replacing beef.
When we get ot the artificial meat, when it gets to the point you describe, I will probably stop eating traditional meat. My metric is bacon. Right now the process is 100 percent lean meat. But some day I think it will happen.
Until then, the veganuts can dream all they want, but it is NOT going to happen!
As I had touched on before, the issue of going vegan is largely a psychological one. And therein lies the problem. We are just coming off of a "Fat is bad, and load up on those carbs!" version of the food pyramid that was simply bad for people. My parent's generation is creeping up on the likely limits of human life. Right now, Life expectancy in the US is dropping though.
The fact is that there has not yet been a plant based meat substitute that is comparable in taste, texture, and nutritional value to what it is supposed to be replacing.
I have a confession to make. There are veggie burgers out there that I love. I discovered them one day when I accidentally grabbed on at a sporting event. So I eat them now. However, I put a couple thick-cut slabs of my home made bacon on top. Good eating!. But they are good, I just don't mistake them for real beef. And of course I still eat regular hamburgers.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Actually, meat production does more harm (greenhouse gases, deforestation) than transportation so it's a good candidate for planet destruction.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Alex Jones sells soy supplements.
Humans evolved from omnivores. Meat, eggs and milk provide a much more concentrated nutrition than a pure vegan diet can. My vegan friends eat 2 to 3 times the volume of food I eat. (And I don't eat a lot of meat; usually 60 to 90 grams per meal.)
Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
Sure, and buying walnuts from a farmer you know is bound to cost a lot less than getting them in a can at the supermarket. You've cut out all the distributing middle-men.
Now local co-op beef here in my urban northeast city generally runs about $12/lb vs. about $9/lb for supermarket beef. That's because we're not in "meat country".
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The vegan is no less a killer than the meat eaters they consider below them
1. Ethics is anything but simple. So I will be only able to give an outline here since time for writing , reading a book on /. in our schedules is hard to come by.
2. Ethics of diet can be considered in 2 ways :
2a. Whether it was / is ethical to eat something in the wild settings. E.g. humans living in a forest, plucking an apple and eating it, or killing a deer and eating it.
Note that here, plant eaters are frequently not predators but reproductive assistants.
2b. Whether it is ethical to eat something in the industrial / agricultural era. Growing wheat / rearing chicken in your farm.
Here, frequently both plant eaters and animal eaters are predators at harvest time. But wheat would certainly go extinct without human support, and chicken would have a hard time. This may or may not play a role in deciding whether "killing" is bad in different scenarios.
But one has to concede that in spite of being weaker than many other competing species, chicken and wheat as species are doing well right now.
3. In both forest / agricultural settings, an animal eater is indirectly eating lots of plants the animal ate. Along with previous points, it is a complex calculation now to figure out how much of a "killer" one is when eating a particular food.
But in forest settings, animal eaters could convince themselves of having avenged the plants the animal ate. In agriculture settings, the animal eater is more of an eater of the animal's diet. Hence more of a killer.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
So why are there living things that are neither? They are not soap. Just because they developed later does not mean they are better.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
On average humans who eat beef with a quality and varied diet grow strong.
The Chinese, who invented pork, survived for thousands of years without eating beef.
Actually, meat production does more harm (greenhouse gases, deforestation) than transportation so it's a good candidate for planet destruction.
And if we all committed mass suicide, your world vision would be complete.
You hate humanity with a fervor that would make a Calvinist blush.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
https://defenders.org/grizzly-...
They're omnivores, like other bears. Nobody posts Youtube videos of them eating berries, digging up ant mounds, or licking moths off the bottom of loose shale because it's just not that dramatic, but that's where they tend to get the bulk of their calories from. They will eat pretty much anything they can get their paws on though, especially in the months leading up to hibernation, where their life depends on them building up enough fat reserves to survive the winter. Calves and the injured especially are textbook examples of opportunistic predation - hunt what's easy to catch if the opportunity presents itself. But like humans in survival situation, hunting can easily become a net loss in calories, so that you'd be better off going hungry unless they prey is easy to catch.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Cats eat birds whole, therefore we should eat more parts of the animal too? I think your argument is a bit flawed there.
All life is precious you insensitive clod, and you do not live unless you kill something. Plant? You killed, animal? You killed it.
Jains only eat parts of plants that can be harvested without killing the plant.
What do they do about their immune systems? Immune systems are pretty deadly killing machines. Macrophages are pretty impressive https://www.youtube.com/watch?... .
Humans die unless they kill. This is just how it is.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I find your comment cold, sarcastic, and frigidly chilling. How does one get a point across to someone as clothesminded as you?
By making a cogent argument. Animals do not exist except by killing. Our immune system kills millions of individual lives every day. I make no distinction, only understand. The most ethical vegan kills only a few less life forms than I do.
Cold? Nature is not warm and fuzzy. There are herbivores, and there are carnivores. Somewhere in the mix, Herbivore became equated with good, and carnivore became equated with evil. And the idea was hatched that if we were all herbivores, we would be good, because herbivore equals good - how rational and logical eh?
In the end, the problem isn't whether I have accepted that humans are omnivores, or that the most ethical vegans try in vain to never kill another animal. Then jump threough hoops to rationalize what life they do kill.
Its that the evil people like me are not trying to encourage vegans to adopt our ways. I seriously do not care if you decide to eat only things that start with the letter A, or become a breatharian. That is your right to eat as you please. Almost all of these discussions come about when the vegan community tries to claim their innate superiority. How terrible wasteful and intent on destroying the planet the evil meat eaters are.
Sarcastic? That's when I'm being kind and holding back. Chilling? Some times the truth is very chilling.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I've you've only had broccoli heads or florets from these heads you're missing a real treat. Tender-stem broccoli, or best of all tender-stem broccoli tips are are several notches higher on the taste ladder than 'ordinary' broccoli.
No, if you don't like the bitter plant taste in the first place, you are not going to like it if you serve a variety that has even more of the distasteful sulforaphane and raphanin left intact. It doesn't matter if you like it ten times as much as the most common variety. It's not suddenly going to taste like meat or grain or ginger. It's going to taste like a brassica plant, for the benefit of those who like those tastes in the first place. Not all do.
The only edible preparation of brassica plants for someone who dislikes the taste is to boil it until the distasteful elements break down - at least a couple of hours, and more if you don't discard the harder cooked parts like stems before cooking.
What I wonder about is if Vegan causes mental illness or if it is the other way round?
The Association between Eating Behavior and Various Health Parameters: A Matched Sample Study
http://www.plosone.org/article...
side-effects-of-vegetarianism
http://www.womenshealthmag.com...
What do they do about their immune systems? Immune systems are pretty deadly killing machines. Macrophages are pretty impressive
If I understand it correctly, they proscribe more killing, pain or upset to other beings than what is necessary for survival. So they accept that the immune system kills, but will only eat foods with antiseptic properties or "live" food like yoghurt if prescribed by a doctor, because either would be killing other living beings.
Forget about moral arguments. Make this *CHEAPER* than beef, but taste close to the same, it'll take over 90% of the market overnight.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
I really don't understand your reasoning. It seems you would rather indulge in meat than prevent the world from becoming uninhabitable for humans.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
:headspin:
How do you figure? Meat is the *least* efficient food.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/cont...
Feeding food to someone else then eating their bodies is dramatically less efficient than eating the food directly. And these figures don't even include the energy spent on producing animal feed.
Humans evolved and spread because they discovered cooking, which increased the calories available to them. Carnivores are necessarily always far fewer in number than herbivores. And don't let your penis-ego delude you into thinking that humans are biologically carnivores.
What do they do about their immune systems? Immune systems are pretty deadly killing machines. Macrophages are pretty impressive
If I understand it correctly, they proscribe more killing, pain or upset to other beings than what is necessary for survival. So they accept that the immune system kills, but will only eat foods with antiseptic properties or "live" food like yoghurt if prescribed by a doctor, because either would be killing other living beings.
Either way, a very inconsistent outlook.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I really don't understand your reasoning. It seems you would rather indulge in meat than prevent the world from becoming uninhabitable for humans.
Because consuming meat != destroying the world. That's just the vegan narrative. If meat eating was the sin you declare, the Inuits would have caused a total collapse of the arctic ecosystem long ago, as their diets consist alomost totally of meat.
But over population quite possibly will destroy us.
Allow me to make a minor correction. It can destroy the world for us. Nature does not care if humanity survives or not.
Is Indiia your model? India has more Vegetarians than the rest of the world combined.
So let's all be like India, as vegetarians they are going to save the world, amirite?
Sorry dear, but overpopulation is a hella bigger problem than those evil souls that allow corpse meat to pass their lips. Your narrative is showing. Now do you have a plan for killing the Inut? Damn meat eaters, That would serve them right, probably.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I'm all for a lower cost veggie substitute fake meats just so long as I can't tell the difference. Until then, I'm going to celebrate life at the top of the food chain.
if you are a vegetarian, Why do you need something that is "like meat" to begin with? Do you miss Real Juicy Meat? Veggies are not good enough for Vegetarians? you chose to eat Veggies, So Eat Veggies and be happy.
Unless you want to pop pills for the rest of your life to get the vitamins that your brain needs to function properly. This vegan stuff as being the natural order of human beings needs to face reality. Though, when you see what B12 deprivation causes to a person's mental state, it explains a lot about the irrational fallacy that vegans are prone to and their obsession with delusions of grandeur. No there is no such thing as a "meat" substitute, it will always lead to a lack of B12 and the serious repercussions that alone will do to anyone's ability to think clearly.
Do Colorless Green Ideas Sleep Furiously?
You can feed 10x as many people a vegan diet as an animal diet.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
We also have the technology to replace sugar with artificial sweeteners. It seems vegans want to force everyone else to live their lifestyle. Why not allow people to choose between artificial beef and genuine beef like people have a choice between using artificial sweeteners and natural sweeteners? While we are trying to make people "do the right thing" maybe we should eliminate all alcohol instead of giving people the choice to drink alcohol or not. I'm sure religious groups such as the Mormons would love to tell you how great their life is for not drinking alcohol. The Mormons regulate alcohol more than they do nuclear waste in Utah. I'm sure they would be happy to make everyone abstain from drinking. Dentists would love to replace all sugar with artificial sweeteners as much as they love fluoride in every cities water supply.
I'm the opposite. As much as I enjoy a dry aged rib eye, I would settle for cheap and easy over taste, but nutritionally I do so much better when I eat a lot of meat. I'm not paleo or Atkins, I just feel better when I rule out grains beans(including soy), nuts and dairy. Which leaves whole vegetables and fruits, a pound of grassfed ground beef a day and some salmon or sardines.
That gets pricey and it is annoying to prepare. I tried the soylent kickstarter, but the massive dose of rice protein was not well absorbed and caused digestion problems that lasted for over a month so it wasn't just adaptation. Then they changed the fish oil to vegetable oil and dropped he protein to starch ratio and was garbage. My triglycerides went from 120 to 380 that year. I'm back on my meat and veggies again and feel great.
So if they made a cheap horrible tasting plant based protein source, but it worked? I would be all in.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
But so far there has NOT been a good substitute in terms of taste, texture, and nutritional value.
I'd pin my hopes on vat-grown beef before a plant-based option.
I have to disagree. Beef has very poor nutrition, and almost any substitite will work. My diet has almost always consisted of (at least) 95% meat , and have remained healthy, likely due to some hunter gatherer heritage, who could say. Beef, however, has not played a large part anymore.. . Sure I used to love a med rare steak but not much now. I did once find some place that made gluten steaks and strips which were just great, don't kbnow why they didn't catch on. The texture was just right, same as the taste, and I would assume also the nutrition. So I know it can be done.
Or a bulking agent.
Fake-meat does not taste quite as nice as real-meat. But what about, say, a mince that is 25% meat and 75% meat substitute?
Phah!I talians and Greeks, and I'd guess most other old world countries have been doing that for hundreds of years. Italians call them .. er.. meatballs! The British call them "sausages" :-)
I admit I initially assumed that would be a minor effect, but my initial investigation suggests that it's a relatively uninvestigated but potentially substantial change in carbohydrate production.
I suspect breeding for higher yields at the expense of all else is a larger part of the problem, but this sounds like something that warrants a lot more attention.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Just no. Tofu will destroy your thyroid and grow boobies on men. And never mind low-carb or paleo diets, meat just tastes better.
Feeding lots. Don't try and claim they aren't a thing, because they are.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I prefer the whole dricket, roastd with a bit salt.
They taste a little bit like small shrimps. But as you eat them with exo scelleton, they are crunchy.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Beef is a huge cause of environmental destruction. It has destroyed most of the rain forests world wide and has creates a ton of greenhouse CO2 emissions. For anyone who thinks that plant based "meats" are not delicious, I would highly suggest trying Beyond Meat patties. I just use some vegetable based bullion and cook it on the stove. They are extremely good! I believe you can get them at Whole Foods.
That logic would work if, at some point in time, there'd been seven billion of them.
Think of two linked sliders. As the one for "percentage of meat in diet" moves up, the one for "total sustainable population" moves down.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
That logic would work if, at some point in time, there'd been seven billion of them.
?quote> But keeping my reply in context, I was accused of wanting to kill of humanity because meat.
The Inuit are living in pretty fair balance with their ecosystem, Their meat diet is not causing the ecosystem they live in into collapse. Their eating meat is not immoral or wrong, unless we decide that the very act of eating meat is always wrong, then we have real moral dilemma on our hands.
Think of two linked sliders. As the one for "percentage of meat in diet" moves up, the one for "total sustainable population" moves down.
While artificial meat might tweak that paradigm by a lot, I'll accept the argument at the moment.
Are we making the argument that we must use as economical a way to produce food as possible in order to pack as many people on earth as possible? That if we live right at the peak of sustainability, that we need to have the most people that the earth can sustain, and it is wise and just and good to at that point figure out how to make food even cheaper and more abundant so we can stuff some more people onto the planet?
I kind of doubt you are making that argument, but that's where the artificial sustainability argument ends up at.
If the kind of food that we have evolved to eat is considered unsustainable to our existence, the problem does not lie in the food source. A quick perusal leads pretty quickly to the conclusion that there are too damn many of us. A sustainable world simply has a lot less homo sapiens sapiens running around it, not changing from a predator to a prey diet so that we can jam more of us onto it..
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Why can't it be used to supplement our current diet so that we still eat beef, but just have less of it? That alone would help. If you give people an ultimatum of course they'll reject and resent it.
Twinstiq, game news