8 ms·

I'm in the same camp as you. Vegetarian since 1989, vegan since 1999. I can certainly say that the quality of fake meats has drastically improved in the past 10

I'm in the same camp as you. Vegetarian since 1989, vegan since 1999. I can certainly say that the quality of fake meats has drastically improved in the past 10 years (see https://gardein.com/ https://gardein.com/, http://fieldroast.com/ http://fieldroast.com/, and http://beyondmeat.com/ http://beyondmeat.com/ as examples), but the stigma surrounding them persists. Short anecdote: There's a donut shop in my town that sold vegan and regular donuts in adjacent but separate displays. In some instances, the donuts on the regular side were also vegan, identical in every way save for the label. They found that they sold far better without the word "vegan" attached to them, and eventually stopped labelling them altogether, providing a side-menu to help vegans identify which are which. Point being, perception is surprisingly important when it comes to taste. > And in america, at least, where meat-eating is tied to masculinity and bacon is worshipped, that's a tough stigma to shake. I'd argue that it really doesn't matter how similar to meat these products get, if they're still seen as "fake". Even if delicious, people tend to gravitate towards "real". But hey, maybe they've found a market that wants this that I'm just not seeing.

nightski 10y ago
It's not just taste. These alternatives are loaded with carbs and just aren't practical for a low carb diet. This is coming from someone who eats a ton of fiber loaded vegetables. It's really hard to find a reasonable substitute for meat proteins that is as efficient and delicious as meat. Protein is not a huge portion of my diet, but it is very important.
- bradbeattie 10y ago
  Seitan does a really good job of heavier texture, low carb, high protein (so long as you're not celiac).
- dayvid 10y ago
  That's not true anymore. Beyond Meat has a Beast Burger with 7g carbs and 23g protein (vegan, no soy, gluten-free, no gmo).
  - personjerry 10y ago
    7g is much more than 0g, especially for a keto diet (as an extreme example)
    - TillE 10y ago
      It's usually possible to maintain ketosis with about 50g of carbohydrates per day, so 7g shouldn't be a huge deal.
      - cowpewter 10y ago
        But if you're spending nearly half of your carb allowance on the "protein" parts of your meals (1 serving/3 meals a day = 21g), how many fresh vegetables are you now not eating to stay under your 50g allowance?
    - MustardTiger 10y ago
      The number of people who need to be on a keto diet is incredibly tiny though. Most people who are on them do not need to be, all evidence shows low carb diets are equally effective regardless of ketosis or not.
      - mixedCase 10y ago
        >all evidence shows low carb diets are equally effective regardless of ketosis or not. Well I will take my anecdotic evidence (and my girlfriend's, and two friends') over your scientific studies. Fat and protein make me feel full well below my caloric needs for maintaining the same weight; I am hardly ever full with carbs, and even when my stomach feel fulls, my brain keeps wanting me to eat.
        andrewflnr 10y ago
        How does this contradict GP? All you've said is "carbs don't help me feel full", which is a far cry from "I must have a ketogenic diet".
kbutler 10y ago
You've also got the issues with processed food: Butchering a critter and cooking it up is a lot more natural than a highly engineered mixture from a group of chemical engineers. It may be that all the processing involved in making the plant compounds look/smell/taste/feel like meat are harmless, even beneficial, but it's perfectly reasonable to withhold trust for some time - especially to those of us who grew up with "Margarine is so much healthier than butter!"
- jdhawk 10y ago
  The chemicals they use to keep the animals foodstuffs free of pests and weeds, along with the antibiotics pumped into them to keep them healthy while in packed conditions? Its all chemical engineered now, unless you can afford to buy a piece of land and DIY. -Avid Meat Eater.
  - toomanybeersies 10y ago
    The sheer scale of industrialisation of livestock is an American thing, especially with beef. Most Beef in the world is grass fed, and not pumped full of antibiotics. Generally animals are more or less left in a field until they're old enough, then taken in a slaughtered.
    - rocho 10y ago
      Yeah right, "in the field". Nowadays you can do old-style animal farming if you have three cows and want to sustain you own family. Otherwise, if you want to sell it, it's just not cost effective. - http://www.rollingstone.com/feature/belly-beast-meat-factory-farms-animal-activists http://www.rollingstone.com/feature/belly-beast-meat-factory... - https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/9031-China-raises-alarm-over-Argentine-beef https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/9031-Ch...
      - Jaruzel 10y ago
        Counter argument for that with regard to the UK: http://assurance.redtractor.org.uk/ http://assurance.redtractor.org.uk/ Most quality beef sold in UK is governed by the Red Tractor food standards and welfare scheme.
munificent 10y ago
I think the problem here is that "vegan" is used to describe two different things: 1. A product that has been changed to not use any animal products. 2. A product that already fits within those constraints. Products in the former group have a history of being noticeably worse than their non-vegan counterpart, so "vegan" carries the stigma of "tastes worse than it looks". That stigma then wafts over to products in the second category. Other categories of products are more careful to use distinct terms. That's why you see things labelled "naturally fat-free" instead of just "fat-free", for example.
- markbao 10y ago
  That's a great point. I wonder if there's an elegant/clean way to denote that something is vegan but not changed to be vegan. "Naturally fat-free" is good, and the sort of plant logo that some restaurants use at least avoid the word "vegan" which may help.
  - AnkhMorporkian 10y ago
    > I wonder if there's an elegant/clean way to denote that something is vegan but not changed to be vegan. Naturally free of animal products?
  - mgkimsal 10y ago
    "naturally vegan" seems most appropriate, no?
  - kevb 10y ago
    Sometimes plant-based is used as a more socially acceptable word for "vegan". I think there's also a difference between titling a product "vegan" and specifying that it is vegan. "Vegan donuts" isn't as appealing to non-vegans as "Donuts (vegan)". Likewise I'd be discouraged to get something labeled "Gluten free cookies", but if I saw "Oatmeal chocolate chip cookies (gluten-free)" I wouldn't hold it against them.
    - bdcs 10y ago
      On a related note: When I was vegan, I said I exclusively ate things made from plants. It was better received and understood. Also I would antagonize friends by giving them vegan pb&js, vegan pickles, vegan French fries, vegan Coke, etc.
pombrand 10y ago
Huge problem with the vegan meat replacements is that they're a lot more expensive than beef, around $7/lb vs ground beef at $3/lb. Like with coal vs solar, for imitation meat to win the market it needs to get less expensive than real meat (and taste as good).
- maerF0x0 10y ago
  Or the subsidies that hide the facts. Beef is very expensive in the sense of TCO, but not that expensive at the grocery store. See: http://michaelpollan.com/profiles/the-high-price-of-cheap-food-mealpolitik-over-lunch-with-michael-pollan/ http://michaelpollan.com/profiles/the-high-price-of-cheap-fo... for a good read on the matter. a snip: "The industrial food chain does produce food more cheaply, in terms of the price you pay at McDonald’s or the supermarket,” replies Pollan, “but the real cost of cheap food is not reflected in those prices. You’re paying for it in your tax dollars because you’re giving farmers $20 billion a year in subsidies. You’re paying for it in public health costs. These subsidies make unhealthy food cheaper than healthy food, and so our country is facing an obesity epidemic."
  - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
    Which is also the case for coal, which makes the original comparison very apt, though I'm not sure if that was intended.
  - Sacho 10y ago
    $20 billion comes up under $100 per person per year in the US. Even giving it a generous x4 multiplier to account for the people subsidizing the industry without being consumers, at $400 per year, given the $3 and $7 prices by parent, you would need to eat under 100 pounds of meat for meat replacements to be viable. The average American allegedly consumes close to 200 pounds of meat[0] per year, so it ends up still being quote economical. [0] http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-availability-(per-capita)-data-system/.aspx#.VC1x2CtdVPQ http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-availability-(per...
    - 10y ago
ZenoArrow 10y ago
From a marketing perspective, I'd suggest the way to shift perceptions would be to run taste test challenges similar to the ones Pepsi ran back in the day. If the burgers are as close to meat versions as they say then it could be good to have people who are reluctant to try it to at least give it a go. Even if they can still tell the difference, the difficulty in telling them apart may be enough to change the perception of the product.
- fakemeatsubs 10y ago
  ones Pepsi ran back in the day Werent those shown to be flawed? My source is Gladwells books, but the pepsi vs coke taste test favoured pepsi because it was sweeter. But in drinking the full can people found pepsi overwhelmingly sweet and coke was more popular. My guess would be a similar thing would happen. You could optimise to appeal to low-quantity taste tests. but as a full proper meal a lot needs to be done (imo)
  - dawnerd 10y ago
    What's funny about those is I always chose the coke, and the employees would always be awkward about it. I think they're flawed in the sense that they were put on by the company itself.
lambda 10y ago
Yeah, I've worked next to a lunch place that describes itself as "plant inspired" rather than "vegan." It turns out that everything they serve is vegan, and they'll confirm it if you ask, but by taking the word "vegan" out of anything public-facing, it's a lot easier to get people to be interested in eating there. I personally eat a low-meat diet (no more than 3 servings of meat a week), but don't generally feel the need to eat any kind of meat-substitutes; there are plenty of delicious, already vegetarian or already vegan foods. It does help eating only vegetarian and not fully vegan; cheese and eggs are good sources of both flavor and protein, and make a good "center" of a dish or "main course" of a meal that is sometimes hard to do with purely vegan food without substitutes, but I've also had plenty of delicious fully vegan meals without meat substitutes. And even when getting closer to meat base dishes, I'm personally more likely to order a "black bean burger" or "chickpea burger" than a generic "veggie burger"; it helps to know what I'm getting, while a lot of the meat substitutes are complicated and processed. And for those processed items that do more often act as a stand in for meat, I generally prefer the more minimally processed ones like seitan, tempeh, or tofu, rather than a "tofu burger" that has a whole bunch of other things in it to make it more similar to a hamburger.
- hahamrfunnyguy 10y ago
  I am similar. I eat a 60-70% plant-based diet, but am also a fan of burgers and the occasional steak. I am really not that interested in an artificially created burger or steak. It is just not appetizing. If I am having something vegetarian, I prefer any of the excellent options you can prepare in your kitchen.
  - majewsky 10y ago
    Yes, but there are many reasons to be vegetarian. I can easily imagine a lot of people that would like to skip meat for ethical reasons (including me, to a certain extent), but do not want to give up the flavor palette that meat offers.
radec 10y ago
agree with what your saying and these burgers would probably sell fine if they didn't get labeled as vegan. but yeah there must be a specific market that does want this, because we've been seeing fake meats for years. personally I'm in a different camp. I've been vegan for a while now. I pretty much never buy fake meat or fake cheese. I don't really understand it. I just eat food I make from the bulk section of the grocery store. I don't see a need to have a "boody plant burger that smells like meat" or a boca burger, that just tastes like a...boca burger. honestly I rather just have a patty made out of blackbeans and lentils that doesn't taste anything like meat. seems way simpler to me.
- croon 10y ago
  Carnivore here. I like vegetarianism in concept, and would like to eat less meat, but I like meat, A LOT. If alternatives were more meatlike (fingers crossed for indistinguishable) I'd gladly eat that regardless of label. Some reservations about macro contents. I understand where you're coming from, but some people don't want to change a habit, but are fine with substitutes.

nightski 10y ago

It's not just taste. These alternatives are loaded with carbs and just aren't practical for a low carb diet. This is coming from someone who eats a ton of fiber loaded vegetables. It's really hard to find a reasonable substitute for meat proteins that is as efficient and delicious as meat. Protein is not a huge portion of my diet, but it is very important.

bradbeattie 10y ago
Seitan does a really good job of heavier texture, low carb, high protein (so long as you're not celiac).
dayvid 10y ago
That's not true anymore. Beyond Meat has a Beast Burger with 7g carbs and 23g protein (vegan, no soy, gluten-free, no gmo).
- personjerry 10y ago
  7g is much more than 0g, especially for a keto diet (as an extreme example)
  - TillE 10y ago
    It's usually possible to maintain ketosis with about 50g of carbohydrates per day, so 7g shouldn't be a huge deal.
    - cowpewter 10y ago
      But if you're spending nearly half of your carb allowance on the "protein" parts of your meals (1 serving/3 meals a day = 21g), how many fresh vegetables are you now not eating to stay under your 50g allowance?
  - MustardTiger 10y ago
    The number of people who need to be on a keto diet is incredibly tiny though. Most people who are on them do not need to be, all evidence shows low carb diets are equally effective regardless of ketosis or not.
    - mixedCase 10y ago
      >all evidence shows low carb diets are equally effective regardless of ketosis or not. Well I will take my anecdotic evidence (and my girlfriend's, and two friends') over your scientific studies. Fat and protein make me feel full well below my caloric needs for maintaining the same weight; I am hardly ever full with carbs, and even when my stomach feel fulls, my brain keeps wanting me to eat.
      - andrewflnr 10y ago
        How does this contradict GP? All you've said is "carbs don't help me feel full", which is a far cry from "I must have a ketogenic diet".

kbutler 10y ago

You've also got the issues with processed food: Butchering a critter and cooking it up is a lot more natural than a highly engineered mixture from a group of chemical engineers. It may be that all the processing involved in making the plant compounds look/smell/taste/feel like meat are harmless, even beneficial, but it's perfectly reasonable to withhold trust for some time - especially to those of us who grew up with "Margarine is so much healthier than butter!"

jdhawk 10y ago
The chemicals they use to keep the animals foodstuffs free of pests and weeds, along with the antibiotics pumped into them to keep them healthy while in packed conditions? Its all chemical engineered now, unless you can afford to buy a piece of land and DIY. -Avid Meat Eater.
- toomanybeersies 10y ago
  The sheer scale of industrialisation of livestock is an American thing, especially with beef. Most Beef in the world is grass fed, and not pumped full of antibiotics. Generally animals are more or less left in a field until they're old enough, then taken in a slaughtered.
  - rocho 10y ago
    Yeah right, "in the field". Nowadays you can do old-style animal farming if you have three cows and want to sustain you own family. Otherwise, if you want to sell it, it's just not cost effective. - http://www.rollingstone.com/feature/belly-beast-meat-factory-farms-animal-activists http://www.rollingstone.com/feature/belly-beast-meat-factory... - https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/9031-China-raises-alarm-over-Argentine-beef https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/9031-Ch...
    - Jaruzel 10y ago
      Counter argument for that with regard to the UK: http://assurance.redtractor.org.uk/ http://assurance.redtractor.org.uk/ Most quality beef sold in UK is governed by the Red Tractor food standards and welfare scheme.

munificent 10y ago

I think the problem here is that "vegan" is used to describe two different things: 1. A product that has been changed to not use any animal products. 2. A product that already fits within those constraints. Products in the former group have a history of being noticeably worse than their non-vegan counterpart, so "vegan" carries the stigma of "tastes worse than it looks". That stigma then wafts over to products in the second category. Other categories of products are more careful to use distinct terms. That's why you see things labelled "naturally fat-free" instead of just "fat-free", for example.

markbao 10y ago
That's a great point. I wonder if there's an elegant/clean way to denote that something is vegan but not changed to be vegan. "Naturally fat-free" is good, and the sort of plant logo that some restaurants use at least avoid the word "vegan" which may help.
- AnkhMorporkian 10y ago
  > I wonder if there's an elegant/clean way to denote that something is vegan but not changed to be vegan. Naturally free of animal products?
- mgkimsal 10y ago
  "naturally vegan" seems most appropriate, no?
- kevb 10y ago
  Sometimes plant-based is used as a more socially acceptable word for "vegan". I think there's also a difference between titling a product "vegan" and specifying that it is vegan. "Vegan donuts" isn't as appealing to non-vegans as "Donuts (vegan)". Likewise I'd be discouraged to get something labeled "Gluten free cookies", but if I saw "Oatmeal chocolate chip cookies (gluten-free)" I wouldn't hold it against them.
  - bdcs 10y ago
    On a related note: When I was vegan, I said I exclusively ate things made from plants. It was better received and understood. Also I would antagonize friends by giving them vegan pb&js, vegan pickles, vegan French fries, vegan Coke, etc.

pombrand 10y ago

Huge problem with the vegan meat replacements is that they're a lot more expensive than beef, around $7/lb vs ground beef at $3/lb. Like with coal vs solar, for imitation meat to win the market it needs to get less expensive than real meat (and taste as good).

maerF0x0 10y ago
Or the subsidies that hide the facts. Beef is very expensive in the sense of TCO, but not that expensive at the grocery store. See: http://michaelpollan.com/profiles/the-high-price-of-cheap-food-mealpolitik-over-lunch-with-michael-pollan/ http://michaelpollan.com/profiles/the-high-price-of-cheap-fo... for a good read on the matter. a snip: "The industrial food chain does produce food more cheaply, in terms of the price you pay at McDonald’s or the supermarket,” replies Pollan, “but the real cost of cheap food is not reflected in those prices. You’re paying for it in your tax dollars because you’re giving farmers $20 billion a year in subsidies. You’re paying for it in public health costs. These subsidies make unhealthy food cheaper than healthy food, and so our country is facing an obesity epidemic."
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  Which is also the case for coal, which makes the original comparison very apt, though I'm not sure if that was intended.
- Sacho 10y ago
  $20 billion comes up under $100 per person per year in the US. Even giving it a generous x4 multiplier to account for the people subsidizing the industry without being consumers, at $400 per year, given the $3 and $7 prices by parent, you would need to eat under 100 pounds of meat for meat replacements to be viable. The average American allegedly consumes close to 200 pounds of meat[0] per year, so it ends up still being quote economical. [0] http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-availability-(per-capita)-data-system/.aspx#.VC1x2CtdVPQ http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-availability-(per...
  - 10y ago

ZenoArrow 10y ago

From a marketing perspective, I'd suggest the way to shift perceptions would be to run taste test challenges similar to the ones Pepsi ran back in the day. If the burgers are as close to meat versions as they say then it could be good to have people who are reluctant to try it to at least give it a go. Even if they can still tell the difference, the difficulty in telling them apart may be enough to change the perception of the product.

fakemeatsubs 10y ago
ones Pepsi ran back in the day Werent those shown to be flawed? My source is Gladwells books, but the pepsi vs coke taste test favoured pepsi because it was sweeter. But in drinking the full can people found pepsi overwhelmingly sweet and coke was more popular. My guess would be a similar thing would happen. You could optimise to appeal to low-quantity taste tests. but as a full proper meal a lot needs to be done (imo)
- dawnerd 10y ago
  What's funny about those is I always chose the coke, and the employees would always be awkward about it. I think they're flawed in the sense that they were put on by the company itself.

lambda 10y ago

Yeah, I've worked next to a lunch place that describes itself as "plant inspired" rather than "vegan." It turns out that everything they serve is vegan, and they'll confirm it if you ask, but by taking the word "vegan" out of anything public-facing, it's a lot easier to get people to be interested in eating there. I personally eat a low-meat diet (no more than 3 servings of meat a week), but don't generally feel the need to eat any kind of meat-substitutes; there are plenty of delicious, already vegetarian or already vegan foods. It does help eating only vegetarian and not fully vegan; cheese and eggs are good sources of both flavor and protein, and make a good "center" of a dish or "main course" of a meal that is sometimes hard to do with purely vegan food without substitutes, but I've also had plenty of delicious fully vegan meals without meat substitutes. And even when getting closer to meat base dishes, I'm personally more likely to order a "black bean burger" or "chickpea burger" than a generic "veggie burger"; it helps to know what I'm getting, while a lot of the meat substitutes are complicated and processed. And for those processed items that do more often act as a stand in for meat, I generally prefer the more minimally processed ones like seitan, tempeh, or tofu, rather than a "tofu burger" that has a whole bunch of other things in it to make it more similar to a hamburger.

hahamrfunnyguy 10y ago
I am similar. I eat a 60-70% plant-based diet, but am also a fan of burgers and the occasional steak. I am really not that interested in an artificially created burger or steak. It is just not appetizing. If I am having something vegetarian, I prefer any of the excellent options you can prepare in your kitchen.
- majewsky 10y ago
  Yes, but there are many reasons to be vegetarian. I can easily imagine a lot of people that would like to skip meat for ethical reasons (including me, to a certain extent), but do not want to give up the flavor palette that meat offers.

radec 10y ago

agree with what your saying and these burgers would probably sell fine if they didn't get labeled as vegan. but yeah there must be a specific market that does want this, because we've been seeing fake meats for years. personally I'm in a different camp. I've been vegan for a while now. I pretty much never buy fake meat or fake cheese. I don't really understand it. I just eat food I make from the bulk section of the grocery store. I don't see a need to have a "boody plant burger that smells like meat" or a boca burger, that just tastes like a...boca burger. honestly I rather just have a patty made out of blackbeans and lentils that doesn't taste anything like meat. seems way simpler to me.

croon 10y ago
Carnivore here. I like vegetarianism in concept, and would like to eat less meat, but I like meat, A LOT. If alternatives were more meatlike (fingers crossed for indistinguishable) I'd gladly eat that regardless of label. Some reservations about macro contents. I understand where you're coming from, but some people don't want to change a habit, but are fine with substitutes.