What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Veggie Burger Battle - Impossible vs Beyond (1 Viewer)

I don't think anyone questions whether animals aren't killed or whether it's better for the environment. 
I'm a little confused by the environment angle. I guess I should probably read up on it. But I don't get what is environmentally bad about beef?

Edit: Googled it and this was the first link I found. Sounds as if the environmental thing was perhaps blown out of proportion?

http://theconversation.com/yes-eating-meat-affects-the-environment-but-cows-are-not-killing-the-climate-94968

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it's odd that if someone were opposed to real juice / blood, they'd be ok with fake juice / blood. That's just me. I fully understand others may not find that odd. 

I don't think anyone questions whether animals aren't killed or whether it's better for the environment. 
It’s not blood that most people are opposed to, I don’t know where that comes from? It’s the dead animal. 

 
I'm a little confused by the environment angle. I guess I should probably read up on it. But I don't get what is environmentally bad about beef?

Edit: Googled it and this was the first link I found. Sounds as if the environmental thing was perhaps blown out of proportion?

http://theconversation.com/yes-eating-meat-affects-the-environment-but-cows-are-not-killing-the-climate-94968
I think the university studies disagree with theconversation.com

In terms of water use, land use/efficiency, greenhouse gasses/methane and the ability to feed an out of control global population, there’s not really a lot of scientific debate. 

 
I guess I don't really get the whole thought process. "I don't want to eat meat! Save the animals! Now feed me something that looks and tastes exactly like those tasty animals I don't want to eat!!!" Just seems really, really odd to me.
My morally motivated vegan SIL won’t eat either because of the similarity. I, however, when free range venison is not an option and am forced to amicably dine out in a vegan establishment gladly consume it. 

 
I think it's odd that if someone were opposed to real juice / blood, they'd be ok with fake juice / blood. That's just me. I fully understand others may not find that odd. 

I don't think anyone questions whether animals aren't killed or whether it's better for the environment. 
hmm ok, to me real blood and fake blood are very different.

 
Exactly what two things are you claiming to be misleading?  Use quotes.
Two parts. 

1)Saying it was genetically modified when while technically true they made their own yeast this does not end up in the final product.  This is a very important distinction. 

2) The lab grown part of the "blood" is not realistic either.  They extracted primarily beet and rabe root juice for the coloring and other plant sources.  The blood that people actually think comes out of meat when you cut into it is actually not blood btw, it's an enzyme.  Guess what you find in beets?  

The process is pretty open source.  It's interesting and worth looking into.  Both houses are trying to get it as sustainable and energy efficient as possible.  

 
Two parts. 

1)Saying it was genetically modified when while technically true they made their own yeast this does not end up in the final product.  This is a very important distinction. 

2) The lab grown part of the "blood" is not realistic either.  They extracted primarily beet and rabe root juice for the coloring and other plant sources.  The blood that people actually think comes out of meat when you cut into it is actually not blood btw, it's an enzyme.  Guess what you find in beets?  

The process is pretty open source.  It's interesting and worth looking into.  Both houses are trying to get it as sustainable and energy efficient as possible.  
What are my quotes?

 
I guess I don't really get the whole thought process. "I don't want to eat meat! Save the animals! Now feed me something that looks and tastes exactly like those tasty animals I don't want to eat!!!" Just seems really, really odd to me.
Beef is delicious, burgers are delicious. Eating something that's almost an exact replica of beef, but doesn't involve death and is better for the environment is odd? There's no mental leap to be made.

 
I don't think that's close to true either. Most vegans are hyper-aware of what they're putting in their bodies and check ingredient lists to a much greater extent than your average convenience food consumer. 
Yep. Everyone seems to know the sanctimonious, loud-mouthed vegans who only eat Oreos, while most I've encountered just want to be healthy and not pestered for choosing a less mainstream diet.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m not sure I’m completely onboard with your analogy but to help you along one thing I’ve noticed (and railed on) is that dietary “religions” have lots of things in common just like actual religions but instead of focusing on their commonality they focus on their differences.  If I get an Impossible cheeseburger with fries and a soda and you get a beef cheeseburger with fries and a soda it seems like vegan/vegetarian would rather spend time harping on the beef rather than focusing on the bread, cheese, fries and soda.  Anyway, I don’t want to highjack and I may try these Impossible burgers - I’ve cut back on beef and wouldn’t mind substituting if they taste ok and aren’t super expensive.
Given your apparent skepticism regarding the healthfulness of beef (or lack thereof), why have you cut back?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the university studies disagree with theconversation.com

In terms of water use, land use/efficiency, greenhouse gasses/methane and the ability to feed an out of control global population, there’s not really a lot of scientific debate. 
I think the world, including the USA, should focus on not having so many damn kids before we focus on our livestock food sources using up all of our resources and polluting the world.

Seems like the population issue should be addressed first.

 
I think the motivation isn’t necessarily to stop eating hamburgers, rather, to stop/reduce consumption of animal products. As you know, people make this choice for many reasons - health, animal welfare, environmental concerns, etc.
I am not sure that they are much healthier than beef.   The impossible burger is loaded with sodium, is higher in saturated fat, and has a lot less protein.  And by the time you put an impossible burger on a bun and load it up with condiments, you aren't eating healthy.

An occasional burger, be it beef or plant-based, is fine but if you're eating a lot of Impossible burgers cause they are healthier you're deluding yourself.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not sure that they are much healthier than beef.   The impossible burger is loaded with sodium, is higher in saturated fat, and has a lot less protein.  And by the time you put an impossible burger on a bun and load it up with condiments, you aren't eating healthy.

An occasional burger, be it beef or plant-based, is fine but if you're eating a lot of Impossible burgers cause they are healthier you're deluding yourself.
Agreed. I was listing reasons why people limit consumption of animal products, not specifically advocating veggie burgers.

 
I think the world, including the USA, should focus on not having so many damn kids before we focus on our livestock food sources using up all of our resources and polluting the world.

Seems like the population issue should be addressed first.
It doesn't have to be either/or. 

 
Northern Voice said:
It doesn't have to be either/or. 
I agree but if one issue is causing the other, wouldn't it be wise to address that issue first?  Let's fix the problem and not the symptom.

 
eoMMan said:
I think the world, including the USA, should focus on not having so many damn kids before we focus on our livestock food sources using up all of our resources and polluting the world.

Seems like the population issue should be addressed first.
We actually have a birth dearth -- our fertility rate keeps dropping and we can't support the social programs we've promised an aging population. We need more people in the West, not less.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are Vegetarians/Vegans cool with the visual of a bleeding veggie burger?
I think it's missing the point.  The point of the burger is to sell them to people that eat meat not too vegetarians.

I gave my friend a beyond sausage the other day (he's a meat and potatoes farm boy) and he said if i didn't tell him he wouldn't have known it was meat

 
I think it's missing the point.  The point of the burger is to sell them to people that eat meat not too vegetarians.

I gave my friend a beyond sausage the other day (he's a meat and potatoes farm boy) and he said if i didn't tell him he wouldn't have known it was meat
But its not any healthier for you as a food choice so unless you have an ethical reason not to eat meat what is the point of this "burger"?

 
But its not any healthier for you as a food choice so unless you have an ethical reason not to eat meat what is the point of this "burger"?
Ethics

I'm not getting into an internet debate with people on the validity of the environmental argument or the health argument but for me, the evidence is very much mounted against beef in particular for both your health and the environment

 
Beef is delicious, burgers are delicious. Eating something that's almost an exact replica of beef, but doesn't involve death and is better for the environment is odd? There's no mental leap to be made.
Holy cow - seems so obvious that this is the main selling point that I'm not sure what all the confusion is about. 

Editing to add: even without the environmental benefit, this is an easy sell.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
But its not any healthier for you as a food choice so unless you have an ethical reason not to eat meat what is the point of this "burger"?
My main problem with them is the sodium content. They season the crap out of the patties to get them to taste like beef burgers, but people don't normally eat burgers without condiments, right? So if they can reduce the amount of sodium, let the cook add condiments/toppings on it, and it could very well be much healthier than a traditional burger.

 
But its not any healthier for you as a food choice so unless you have an ethical reason not to eat meat what is the point of this "burger"?
I didn't realize anyone had directly compared the healthfulness of beef versus these non-meat burgers.

Assuming they are equally unhealthy,  why are animal welfare and environmental concerns not good enough reasons? Or <gasp>, maybe someone will actually prefer the taste?

 
I didn't realize anyone had directly compared the healthfulness of beef versus these non-meat burgers.

Assuming they are equally unhealthy,  why are animal welfare and environmental concerns not good enough reasons? Or <gasp>, maybe someone will actually prefer the taste?
My point was about the bleeding...none of this and it has yet to be answered. 

 
My point was about the bleeding...none of this and it has yet to be answered. 
I guess I missed that in the post I quoted.

My guess is most vegetarians/vegans would not have a problem with the visual of “fake” blood, but some people (both carnivores and non-) would prefer a burger appear more burgerly.

I assume you don’t condone murder. Do you object to fake blood in horror movies?

 
I guess I missed that in the post I quoted.

My guess is most vegetarians/vegans would not have a problem with the visual of “fake” blood, but some people (both carnivores and non-) would prefer a burger appear more burgerly.

I assume you don’t condone murder. Do you object to fake blood in horror movies?
oh boy. have a good season guy

 
Sorry to point out the flaw in your premise using a ridiculous example, but I don’t understand why you’d even wonder if non-meat eaters would oppose something composed entirely of plant products.
If nothing else, this thread illustrates how many different takes there are on this topic. And how much people love to argue. 

I don't think it's odd at all to question whether a person strongly opposed to killing and eating animals would be cool with eating something that has fake blood/juice. Maybe they're fine with it. But I could easily see many not being fine.

It's not the same as the average movie goer and fake movie blood. It's a person who feels strongly enough about not killing animals and consuming their blood/juice that they've made some fairly inconvenient lifestyle choices. It's not odd at all in my opinion to think they wouldn't be cool with consuming fake animal blood.

 
I had one of these fake/impossible “burgers” the other day - some coworker dropped a bag of em off in the lunchroom.

pretty much tasted like ketchup/mustard/mayo/onion/pickle

which I was fine with, considering it was from checkers/Rally’s.

wouldnt go out of my way to order one though. 

 
If nothing else, this thread illustrates how many different takes there are on this topic. And how much people love to argue. 

I don't think it's odd at all to question whether a person strongly opposed to killing and eating animals would be cool with eating something that has fake blood/juice. Maybe they're fine with it. But I could easily see many not being fine.

It's not the same as the average movie goer and fake movie blood. It's a person who feels strongly enough about not killing animals and consuming their blood/juice that they've made some fairly inconvenient lifestyle choices. It's not odd at all in my opinion to think they wouldn't be cool with consuming fake animal blood.
It is REALLY odd to think someone opposed to killing animals has a problem with fake blood.  That is one of the most absurd things I've read.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Given your apparent skepticism regarding the healthfulness of beef (or lack thereof), why have you cut back?
I was eating too much protein for what I was doing.  My macros were not where I wanted them.  And yes, I'm still skeptical that someone can provide evidence that beef in moderation is something I should be worried about.

I see 3 main reasons to not eat beef

1. Health

2. Animal rights

3. Environment

I'm much more convinced that #3 is the largest of the 3 issues.  Health would be last on that list for me. 

 
If nothing else, this thread illustrates how many different takes there are on this topic. And how much people love to argue. 

I don't think it's odd at all to question whether a person strongly opposed to killing and eating animals would be cool with eating something that has fake blood/juice. Maybe they're fine with it. But I could easily see many not being fine.

It's not the same as the average movie goer and fake movie blood. It's a person who feels strongly enough about not killing animals and consuming their blood/juice that they've made some fairly inconvenient lifestyle choices. It's not odd at all in my opinion to think they wouldn't be cool with consuming fake animal blood.
They are opposed to animals suffering, not the appearance of blood. Or meat, for that matter. If something resembling blood/meat would sway a few less animals being killed, I would think they would be in favor of it, if anything.

I find it far easier to imagine someone not watching movies which implicitly condone/minimize the importance of violence with their fake portrayal of blood. Unlike the faux blood in some veggie burgers, on-screen violence is doing nothing to decrease real life killing.

 
I was eating too much protein for what I was doing.  My macros were not where I wanted them.  And yes, I'm still skeptical that someone can provide evidence that beef in moderation is something I should be worried about.

I see 3 main reasons to not eat beef

1. Health

2. Animal rights

3. Environment

I'm much more convinced that #3 is the largest of the 3 issues.  Health would be last on that list for me. 
I stopped eating land animals over a decade ago, primarily for reason #2. As science discovers more and more about fish suffering, I may need to move a little closer to veganism.

Despite all the back and forth I’ve had with VLC crowd, I think 2 and 3 are the more important reasons for limiting meat consumption.

 
It is REALLY odd to think someone opposed to killing animals has a problem with fake blood.  That is one of the most absurd things I've read.
You mean beet juice? I think it's gross but not because it resembles beef blood.

 
I stopped eating land animals over a decade ago, primarily for reason #2. As science discovers more and more about fish suffering, I may need to move a little closer to veganism.

Despite all the back and forth I’ve had with VLC crowd, I think 2 and 3 are the more important reasons for limiting meat consumption.
I respect that - what is done by a lot of factory farms is horrible.  I wish they were better regulated and they could put a stop to the abuse.  On the environment, I think there's a lot there with cattle/beef.  I know even less about the impact of chicken and fish on the environment.  I wish my family ate more venison as I think thinning the deer population is a good thing.

 
I respect that - what is done by a lot of factory farms is horrible.  I wish they were better regulated and they could put a stop to the abuse.  On the environment, I think there's a lot there with cattle/beef.  I know even less about the impact of chicken and fish on the environment.  I wish my family ate more venison as I think thinning the deer population is a good thing.
Definitely have respect for sustenance hunters, who have taken part in the process of killing the animals they consume. But I have mixed feelings about thinning herds, as the only reason they’re out of control is man killing most of the apex predators.

 
They are opposed to animals suffering, not the appearance of blood. Or meat, for that matter. If something resembling blood/meat would sway a few less animals being killed, I would think they would be in favor of it, if anything.

I find it far easier to imagine someone not watching movies which implicitly condone/minimize the importance of violence with their fake portrayal of blood. Unlike the faux blood in some veggie burgers, on-screen violence is doing nothing to decrease real life killing.
Thanks. We can just disagree there. All good. 

 
On the environment issue, so the take is cows cause environmental damage, I guess via emissions and grazing? (Those are the ones I have seen mentioned). So if everyone stops eating beef, wouldn't there be more cows and therefore more damage?

 
On the environment issue, so the take is cows cause environmental damage, I guess via emissions and grazing? (Those are the ones I have seen mentioned). So if everyone stops eating beef, wouldn't there be more cows and therefore more damage?
What on earth is this??

 
On the environment issue, so the take is cows cause environmental damage, I guess via emissions and grazing? (Those are the ones I have seen mentioned). So if everyone stops eating beef, wouldn't there be more cows and therefore more damage?
We protect the cows from predators currently - if everybody decided all at once to stop eating beef then there would be no need to protect them.  Their numbers would most likely go down.  I think there other environmental concerns beyond just the cow itself though - I’m not educated enough on the subject to give a better answer.

 
AAABatteries said:
We protect the cows from predators currently - if everybody decided all at once to stop eating beef then there would be no need to protect them.  Their numbers would most likely go down.  I think there other environmental concerns beyond just the cow itself though - I’m not educated enough on the subject to give a better answer.
The cow population is absolutely 100% controlled by humans, down to the very last head. No cow is born without a human willing it so.

If beef demand starts to drop, the farmers/agribusiness slows down reproduction to account for the reduced need. It costs way too much to house and feed cattle to have them just stand there and grow old. There will never be a situation where we have excess cattle alive on this planet.

 
While I'm stunned by some of the comments and questions in here, I think it's good that this discussion is being had so more people are informed.

 
The cow population is absolutely 100% controlled by humans, down to the very last head. No cow is born without a human willing it so.

If beef demand starts to drop, the farmers/agribusiness slows down reproduction to account for the reduced need. It costs way too much to house and feed cattle to have them just stand there and grow old. There will never be a situation where we have excess cattle alive on this planet.
That's sort of what I figured, which is why the whole "save the animals" angle seems so odd to me.

 
That's sort of what I figured, which is why the whole "save the animals" angle seems so odd to me.
It’s not “save the animals”, it’s try and minimize man’s contribution to their suffering. Factory farming is cruel even if the animals aren’t killed. 

While cow, chicken and pig numbers are boosted by industrial meat production, their quality of life seems pretty sh!tty. Even if the current populations aren’t sustainable in nature, I think many vegetarians would prefer they return to the wild, as opposed to overcrowded farms where they are force fed, pumped full of antibiotics and hormones. Free range, organic farms are a little better, but even then, some people argue we shouldn’t inflict pain/kill animals when plenty of other food is available. Our societal double standard is particularly evident in the way people treat their pets versus livestock - I bet many people would feel differently if they spent some time educating themselves on the living conditions of animals on large scale farms.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top