8 ms·

I asked myself the same question. Why do we need to replace meat by something? Are vegans really lacking protein? Moreover, even if it's true, if we just take

by BenderV 11y ago

I asked myself the same question. Why do we need to replace meat by something? Are vegans really lacking protein? Moreover, even if it's true, if we just take into account an important diminution of the meat consumption, will people lack proteins? I'm assuming we eat more meat than we ever did in our history.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
ch0wn 11y ago
The comment you replied to talked about cheap and sustainable sources of protein. Meat is neither.
- masklinn 11y ago
  Chicken, pork, salmon and tuna are definitely cheap sources of protein (depending on the country, but generally at least one of them is cheap).
  - kspaans 11y ago
    That cheapness is mainly due to non-priced-in externalities (greenhouse gas farts! water use!) and poor treatment of animals (not that I'm a PETA member or anything). EDIT: And as mentioned elsewhere: government subsidies in many countries (and/or import/export controls).
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - masklinn 11y ago
      So you agree that there are meats which are cheap sources of protein?
      - Retric 11y ago
        Government subsidies don't actually lower economic prices. They just change who pays. Removing those subsidies would double most meat prices which means there far less 'cheap'. There is increasing pressure to lower farming subsides in most of the world in part because food costs have already fallen so much. 1935 1/lb chicken $5.07 (inflation adj), 2011 1lb chicken: $1.34 But, also from a wide range of more politically charged issues.
        masklinn 11y ago
        > Government subsidies don't actually lower economic prices. They just change who pays. Removing those subsidies would double most meat prices which means there far less 'cheap'. Removing those subsidies would not affect only meat.
        nyan4 11y ago
        Citation needed
  - tertius 11y ago
    Chicken and bugs are about equal when it comes to gram vs. gram of protein.
- bad_user 11y ago
  Why isn't meat a sustainable source of protein? And yes, I'm pretty much aware of current industrial farming processes and what that does to the environment, but maybe you're missing the forest from the trees, as in maybe it's industrial farming that we should get rid of. Plants and animals are basically engines storing and converting the sun's energy into nutrients and natural ecosystems are very much sustainable. Add fossil fuels in the equation, like what the industrial age did and you get the current clusterfuck. Our grandparents seemed to have no problem in raising their own livestock with sustainable practices. Surely we can do better than them, since we live in the information age and all that. And for people worried about efficiency, cost and over-population, we are wasting about one third of the food we produce right now. And we spend much less of our income and time on acquiring food. There is room for taking a step back in terms of throughput and maybe focus on quality rather than quantity. Which might be a good idea given that even though the calories in our food is at an all times high, for the first time in history we're seeing overweight children suffering from malnutrition. The real problem I'm having with your argument, as it's what vegans usually say, is that if you want cheap, you can't beat a combination of corn and soy grown through an industrial process, as these are the most efficient farmed plants we have. Whereas many fruits are very inefficient, consume a lot of water and are not sustainable at scale. Just saying, if you want efficiency, start eating corn.
  - nawitus 11y ago
    Animals are inefficient and unnecessary in food production. You're pretty much throwing energy out for no benefit.
    - qbrass 11y ago
      Animals eat things you won't and turn them into things you will eat.
  - noondip 11y ago
    > Why isn't meat a sustainable source of protein? In short, it is because an animal will always eat more food to be food, than would be needed to just feed people on plants directly. > maybe it's industrial farming that we should get rid of "Free-range" farming practices are even more damaging and unsustainable than confined breeding operations, for the simple reason it takes more land and more resources. > Plants and animals are basically engines storing and converting the sun's energy into nutrients and natural ecosystems are very much sustainable. Not quite, plants are the nutrient producers - they synthesize solar energy into every amino acid essential to animals, into phytonutrients, etc. Animals, on the other hand, are nutrient consumers. I.e., animal derived foods are only nutritious because the animals ate plants. > calories in our food is at an all times high That's mostly from animal products and refined, packaged foods. > Whereas many fruits are very inefficient, consume a lot of water and are not sustainable at scale This is simply conjecture. Are you absolutely sure growing fruit is inefficient compared to modern animal agriculture? > start eating corn. Gladly. Starchy vegetables - complex carbohydrates - are the foods our ancestors ate for many years; they are regarded as a diet staple of several ancient societies.
PerfectElement 11y ago
Right, vegans are not protein deficient and many people thrive on high carb diets (see blue zones, adventist health studies, etc.) Unfortunately we've all been bombarded with the protein myth (more protein == healthier) and even the smart people of HN can't seem to question this belief objectively.
- agentultra 11y ago
  And don't forget the cultural indoctrination in the West that meat is manliness. In the northern parts of the hemisphere when Spring rolls around the airwaves are inundated with advertisements for barbecues and beer. Meat from one source or another is the center piece for nearly every meal. And the restaurants, fast or otherwise, are only catering to this obsession with over-indulging in meat. The only thing that seems to turn people off it are cholesterol and heart surgery. Don't get me wrong a good steak is fucking delicious. But for me it's like cake. I can't and don't want to have it often. A good burger is good but to borrow a cliché: too much of a good thing... Can we ever eat insects? Well... can you make it look and taste like a classic cheeseburger? Will I still get my Sunday bacon?
  - tertius 11y ago
    Meat is inherently manly. Consuming meat at the scale that Americans (for instance) do is not manly, it's extremely irresponsible. Steak as cake. I like that. I'm genetically susceptible to cholesterol more so than others. I like this way of thinking about it. Now, I would probably eat steak more often than cake, I don't really eat cake that much.
- briHass 11y ago
  Probably because it's not a myth that high protein diets are healthful. High protein diets typically result in better maintenance of lean mass (muscle) and better health markers if compared with one that replaces protein with carbs (http://examine.com/faq/how-does-protein-affect-weight-loss/ http://examine.com/faq/how-does-protein-affect-weight-loss/) Many studies have shown that replacing fat or carbs 1:1 (by calories) with protein leads to better body composition and (sometimes) slight weight reduction. (http://authoritynutrition.com/how-protein-can-help-you-lose-weight/ http://authoritynutrition.com/how-protein-can-help-you-lose-...) That's not to say that everyone should be eating bodybuilder levels of protein, but the evidence seems to support that focusing on it ahead of fat/carbs is probably a wise move.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
halviti 11y ago
It's not just about replacing meat, it's about alternative sources of food. Imagine mass extinction events, global war disrupting supply chains, space colonies, etc. These are instances where you would go.. "thank goodness we developed some decent insect food".

by BenderV 11y ago

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

ch0wn 11y ago

The comment you replied to talked about cheap and sustainable sources of protein. Meat is neither.

masklinn 11y ago
Chicken, pork, salmon and tuna are definitely cheap sources of protein (depending on the country, but generally at least one of them is cheap).
- kspaans 11y ago
  That cheapness is mainly due to non-priced-in externalities (greenhouse gas farts! water use!) and poor treatment of animals (not that I'm a PETA member or anything). EDIT: And as mentioned elsewhere: government subsidies in many countries (and/or import/export controls).
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - masklinn 11y ago
    So you agree that there are meats which are cheap sources of protein?
    - Retric 11y ago
      Government subsidies don't actually lower economic prices. They just change who pays. Removing those subsidies would double most meat prices which means there far less 'cheap'. There is increasing pressure to lower farming subsides in most of the world in part because food costs have already fallen so much. 1935 1/lb chicken $5.07 (inflation adj), 2011 1lb chicken: $1.34 But, also from a wide range of more politically charged issues.
      - masklinn 11y ago
        > Government subsidies don't actually lower economic prices. They just change who pays. Removing those subsidies would double most meat prices which means there far less 'cheap'. Removing those subsidies would not affect only meat.
        nyan4 11y ago
        Citation needed
- tertius 11y ago
  Chicken and bugs are about equal when it comes to gram vs. gram of protein.
bad_user 11y ago
Why isn't meat a sustainable source of protein? And yes, I'm pretty much aware of current industrial farming processes and what that does to the environment, but maybe you're missing the forest from the trees, as in maybe it's industrial farming that we should get rid of. Plants and animals are basically engines storing and converting the sun's energy into nutrients and natural ecosystems are very much sustainable. Add fossil fuels in the equation, like what the industrial age did and you get the current clusterfuck. Our grandparents seemed to have no problem in raising their own livestock with sustainable practices. Surely we can do better than them, since we live in the information age and all that. And for people worried about efficiency, cost and over-population, we are wasting about one third of the food we produce right now. And we spend much less of our income and time on acquiring food. There is room for taking a step back in terms of throughput and maybe focus on quality rather than quantity. Which might be a good idea given that even though the calories in our food is at an all times high, for the first time in history we're seeing overweight children suffering from malnutrition. The real problem I'm having with your argument, as it's what vegans usually say, is that if you want cheap, you can't beat a combination of corn and soy grown through an industrial process, as these are the most efficient farmed plants we have. Whereas many fruits are very inefficient, consume a lot of water and are not sustainable at scale. Just saying, if you want efficiency, start eating corn.
- nawitus 11y ago
  Animals are inefficient and unnecessary in food production. You're pretty much throwing energy out for no benefit.
  - qbrass 11y ago
    Animals eat things you won't and turn them into things you will eat.
- noondip 11y ago
  > Why isn't meat a sustainable source of protein? In short, it is because an animal will always eat more food to be food, than would be needed to just feed people on plants directly. > maybe it's industrial farming that we should get rid of "Free-range" farming practices are even more damaging and unsustainable than confined breeding operations, for the simple reason it takes more land and more resources. > Plants and animals are basically engines storing and converting the sun's energy into nutrients and natural ecosystems are very much sustainable. Not quite, plants are the nutrient producers - they synthesize solar energy into every amino acid essential to animals, into phytonutrients, etc. Animals, on the other hand, are nutrient consumers. I.e., animal derived foods are only nutritious because the animals ate plants. > calories in our food is at an all times high That's mostly from animal products and refined, packaged foods. > Whereas many fruits are very inefficient, consume a lot of water and are not sustainable at scale This is simply conjecture. Are you absolutely sure growing fruit is inefficient compared to modern animal agriculture? > start eating corn. Gladly. Starchy vegetables - complex carbohydrates - are the foods our ancestors ate for many years; they are regarded as a diet staple of several ancient societies.

PerfectElement 11y ago

Right, vegans are not protein deficient and many people thrive on high carb diets (see blue zones, adventist health studies, etc.) Unfortunately we've all been bombarded with the protein myth (more protein == healthier) and even the smart people of HN can't seem to question this belief objectively.

agentultra 11y ago
And don't forget the cultural indoctrination in the West that meat is manliness. In the northern parts of the hemisphere when Spring rolls around the airwaves are inundated with advertisements for barbecues and beer. Meat from one source or another is the center piece for nearly every meal. And the restaurants, fast or otherwise, are only catering to this obsession with over-indulging in meat. The only thing that seems to turn people off it are cholesterol and heart surgery. Don't get me wrong a good steak is fucking delicious. But for me it's like cake. I can't and don't want to have it often. A good burger is good but to borrow a cliché: too much of a good thing... Can we ever eat insects? Well... can you make it look and taste like a classic cheeseburger? Will I still get my Sunday bacon?
- tertius 11y ago
  Meat is inherently manly. Consuming meat at the scale that Americans (for instance) do is not manly, it's extremely irresponsible. Steak as cake. I like that. I'm genetically susceptible to cholesterol more so than others. I like this way of thinking about it. Now, I would probably eat steak more often than cake, I don't really eat cake that much.
briHass 11y ago
Probably because it's not a myth that high protein diets are healthful. High protein diets typically result in better maintenance of lean mass (muscle) and better health markers if compared with one that replaces protein with carbs (http://examine.com/faq/how-does-protein-affect-weight-loss/ http://examine.com/faq/how-does-protein-affect-weight-loss/) Many studies have shown that replacing fat or carbs 1:1 (by calories) with protein leads to better body composition and (sometimes) slight weight reduction. (http://authoritynutrition.com/how-protein-can-help-you-lose-weight/ http://authoritynutrition.com/how-protein-can-help-you-lose-...) That's not to say that everyone should be eating bodybuilder levels of protein, but the evidence seems to support that focusing on it ahead of fat/carbs is probably a wise move.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

halviti 11y ago

It's not just about replacing meat, it's about alternative sources of food. Imagine mass extinction events, global war disrupting supply chains, space colonies, etc. These are instances where you would go.. "thank goodness we developed some decent insect food".