3 ms·
Because a meat substitute is supposed to be like meat. And if it's not, sure, it can still be good - but that's irrelevant when crafting a meat substitute. You
by yathern 9y ago
Because a meat substitute is supposed to be like meat. And if it's not, sure, it can still be good - but that's irrelevant when crafting a meat substitute.
Your point about sausage is actually proof of this. Sausage is good and tasty - but not a substitute for a cut of meat. No one is going to have a sausage burger, and suggest they're equivalent.
- JoeAltmaier 9y agoI'd disagree on every point. Sausage burgers are very, very good, and a superior product to a regular one in every way. Maybe agree on the 'market as meat substitute' part. Time for 'new foods' to quit bragging about being the same as anything.
- yathern 9y ago> No one would have a sausage burger and suggest they're equivalent > I'd disagree on every point. Sausage burgers are very, very good, and a superior product to a regular one in every way. Alright, but that's my point. You enjoy a sausage burger, that's fine, my point wasn't that they're worse. It actually sounds quite tasty. But just not equivalent. Sausage tastes entirely different from ground beef. And the same goes for plant-based-pork-flavored-foods. If they're going to be a substitute, they have to be a substitute, in the sense that they can be used in the same way, with a goal of limiting the difference you notice between them.
- JoeAltmaier 9y agoTotally in agreement. We need a word other than 'substitute' that means 'can be used in cooking like'. Vs 'tastes exactly like'. That would help the dialog tremendously.
- KozmoNau7 9y ago"Meat analog"? "Meat equivalent"? I'm not sure those terms are palatable to customers, though.