6 ms·

I find it interesting in this day and age, where we know so much about the hazards of processed foods, that some many seemingly health-conscious folks are gravi

I find it interesting in this day and age, where we know so much about the hazards of processed foods, that some many seemingly health-conscious folks are gravitating to the Impossible meat 2.0. The ingredient list of the 2.0 is: > Water, soy protein concentrate, coconut oil, sunflower oil, natural flavors, 2% or less of: potato protein, methylcellulose, yeast extract, cultured dextrose, food starch modified, soy leghemoglobin, salt, soy protein isolate, mixed tocopherols (vitamin E), zinc gluconate, thiamine hydrochloride (vitamin B1), sodium ascorbate (vitamin C), niacin, pyridoxine hydrochloride (vitamin B6), riboflavin (vitamin B2), vitamin B12. This seems as processed as I can possibly imagine. I understand the environmental and health effects of beef, but I truly wonder which is healthier for you. Beef is pretty much as natural as it can come, while the 2.0 meat comes from a lab. That said, I've absolutely loved the Impossible burger at Mendocino Farms. I'd recommend it to anyone. But I none-the-less wonder about the health effects.

currymj 7y ago
my own intuition on this is that making food using complicated industrial processes isn't bad or good in itself. but it is more profitable for many reasons to make food that is sweet, salty, fatty, and calorically dense, and modern manufacturing lets you do this on an unprecedented scale, so it just ends up that in practice "natural", "whole", "slow" etc foods end up being better for you. it seems possible, although likely less profitable, to make highly-processed food that is reasonably healthy.
chrisfosterelli 7y ago
"Processed foods" are not inherently hazardous. In fact, nearly all food we eat is processed food. I presume you're referring to tertiary processed food. The Soylent FAQ[0] has a good way of describing this: > A box of instant macaroni could be unhealthy because it contains low levels of important vitamins and minerals while containing excess amounts of salt, cholesterol, and saturated fat. The macaroni is not inherently unhealthy because it was manufactured in a factory, it’s unhealthy because it lacks vital nutrients that the body needs. [0]: https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002689323-What-makes-Soylent-different-from-other-processed-foods- https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002689323-What-...
- torstenvl 7y ago
  Yes. But there's a strong enough correlation for it to be beneficial. Most processed foods are processed to add sugars, fats, and sodium to make them more tasty, and to remove fiber to make them easier to eat. You're right that a person shouldn't pre-judge a good based solely on its having been manufactured. But it's also true that someone who generally avoids processed foods will end up avoiding the most unhealthy foods available.
- chrisseaton 7y ago
  > A box of instant macaroni could be unhealthy because it contains low levels of important vitamins and minerals while containing excess amounts of salt, cholesterol, and saturated fat What macaroni contains cholesterol and saturated fat? And seems unfair to compare macaroni, a plain ingredient usually combined with others, with a complete meal.
  - nothrabannosir 7y ago
    From the "instant", I assume they're referring to mac n "cheese", with whatever is passing for the latter containing both of those.
    - chrisseaton 7y ago
      Oh right I guess that's a dish made with macaroni then, and not just the pasta itself, so that's confusing.
      - xeromal 7y ago
        No one on earth eats plain macaroni. You have it mixed with something. lol
        chrisseaton 7y ago
        Yes it's combined with a sauce or something - meat, tomato, cheese, etc. But then that gives you wildly different nutrition profiles. Just saying 'box of macaroni' doesn't tell you anything.
gregoryexe 7y ago
They'd feed us sawdust if we'd pay for it. As a matter of fact, they used to try just that.
negativegate 7y ago
> Beef is pretty much as natural as it can come It being natural doesn't have any bearing on how healthy it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
- Andrex 7y ago
  Thank you. For some reason people tend to think the natural world and the human body are 100% optimized to each other, when the truth is it's still very much an evolutionary work in progress...
- chubot 7y ago
  Natural doesn't necessarily mean anything, but time-tested does. It's too long to explain here, but people who have read both Michael Pollan and Taleb probably understand what I mean. Nutrition isn't a science on solid ground, and food isn't a linear combination of its nutrients. It's true that "natural" beef might be raised in ways that aren't time-tested (in fact it's very likely given modern farming). But something like Impossible Burger is also guaranteed not to be time-tested. That isn't to say I wouldn't try it, but it's definitely an important difference.
  - saagarjha 7y ago
    > Natural doesn't necessarily mean anything, but time-tested does. Being “time-tested” helps, but it’s not necessarily the only thing to keep in mind. Consider that lead was “time-tested” for thousands of years.
    - chubot 7y ago
      I don't really know the history of lead, but I suspect it illustrates the point. There are no traditional foods with lead in them, because people who ate lead would have died, ensuring that the custom didn't survive. However lead paint was a relatively new thing. People didn't have painted walls for thousands of years. It was used for awhile (not sure how long), and then the test of time figured out that it was poisonous. Is there some history you know of where the test of time didn't work? It's almost tautological to be honest. (And tautological does not mean "untrue" :) ) Lead might have been "bad" by modern standards in the past, but there were also hundreds of other things that were worse for mortality, so maybe lead use in certain applications just got noticed in the last century or so.
lkbm 7y ago
I'm vegetarian primarily for animal well-being reasons, and environmental second. Health is merely a nice plus for me. That said, the Beyond Meat burgers and sausages have impressive satiety -- probably due to the high amount of saturated fat. (I only tried the Impossible Burger once, but I assume they're similar.) There's not much evidence, from what I've seen, that being "processed" is a health issue. The main thing is that highly-refined foods frequently have a high calorie-to-satiety ratio and/or are "high-reward", both of which result in over-eating. Beyond Meat, at least, does the opposite for me. I frequently bike 20+ miles on Saturday and/or Sunday, and one thing I've found is that if I eat some Beyond Meat fake meat, I'll later realize that I've burnt 2k+ Calories, eaten maybe a thousand, and still not feel particularly hungry. I actually have to pay attention to eating enough, whereas normally my body is quite eager to ingest 5k+ Calories if I choose the wrong foods. (Veggie soup is maybe more filling, but I can be full and still crave food.) Kielbasa was the meat I missed most when I became vegetarian, and the Beyond Meat italian sausage is the first thing I've had that approaches it. If Impossible Foods can beat that, that's exciting to me.
- gnicholas 7y ago
  I tried Beyond Meat last night for the first time and was surprised how un-filling it was for me. I ate one and a half burgers with plenty of toppings and was still hungry after. And I'd been snacking before dinner, so I wasn't famished to begin with. The taste was pretty good, but I have to figure I'm eating two burgers ($6 in patties) at a minimum. EDIT: mind sharing why you're downvoting this? Is my experience not relevant?
  - dwater 7y ago
    I weigh 140lbs, and eat meat probably 2-3 times a week on average. I eat a regular burger probably once every 3 months or so and it usually knocks me on my ass and makes me feel an extreme level of full as well as very tired (I usually have fries and a beer at the same time). A Beyond burger with cheese and fries shocked me with how similar I felt afterwards, I had it around 7p and struggled to stay awake another 3 hours. I even had a similar feeling of still being satiated when I woke up the next morning like I get from eating a big fatty burger.
fhsga77 7y ago
I think from the ingredient list it's pretty clear that it's not healthy: methylcellulose an indigestible emulsifier and stool softener cultured dextrose fermented sugar used as preservative soy leghemoglobin Actually not from soy, but biofactured by genetically engineered yeast. I don't know all the reasons for its inclusion, but leghemoglobin can be used as red food coloring. I don't consider burgers particularly healthy, but I wouldn't consider the Impossible Burger as a healthy alternative.
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  methylcellulose "an indigestible emulsifier and stool softener" You have to be joking. Normal cellulose makes up a huge amount of most healthy and completely unprocessed vegetables, is considered great for you, and is also an indigestible emulsifier and stool softener. You can't just name some use that sounds icky and declare that something is bad for you. It's possible that methylating it causes a problem, but these specific reasons are nonsense. "fermented sugar used as preservative" So is alcohol, and it looks like this kind of fermentation typically uses normal cheese bacteria. Shouldn't be an issue for most people. "Actually not from soy, but biofactured by genetically engineered yeast." So what?
- saagarjha 7y ago
  > I think from the ingredient list it's pretty clear that it's not healthy How did you arrive at this conclusion?
- technothrasher 7y ago
  You just listed three ingredients and their typical usages. You didn't make any case for why these three ingredients might be unhealthy.
- nitrogen 7y ago
  leghemoglobin... I don't know all the reasons for its inclusion It's in all the older news about the company and on their website -- that's what makes it look, cook, and taste like meat.
calahad 7y ago
Its about animal cruelty for many people.
amelius 7y ago
> Beef is pretty much as natural as it can come, while the 2.0 meat comes from a lab. Not just from a lab, but those powders which it contains may come from China, where regulations may be lacking.
- icegreentea2 7y ago
  If you're going to be worried about that, you should be worried about normal sausage too.
  - codyb 7y ago
    As a random aside, I picked up a meat grinder for my stand mixer and making my own sausage from super high quality ingredients then freezing a ton was an awesome way to get preservative free, delicious pork and lamb sausage for about three months in a single afternoon. It was maybe a bit much to try ten pounds grinding my first time making but the results were very yum.
- sct202 7y ago
  The cows your beef comes from are probably eating powders from China in the form of vitamins and antibiotics.
  - amelius 7y ago
    Ok, but that is 1 biological filtering step away from eating them directly.
    - unclenoriega 7y ago
      Or perhaps one biological concentrating step.
fisherjeff 7y ago
I actually find that ingredient list surprisingly tame. And I think typically the hazards of processed foods are that they’re made from low quality ingredients, then inundated with salt, sugar, and fat to make them anything from palatable to addictive. Plus a bunch of preservatives for shelf stability.
nathancahill 7y ago
I'd float the idea that health-conscious && (environment-conscious || animal-conscious) often go together. And if you're going to eat "meat", this is a much more environmental and animal friendly option than beef. For the purely health-conscious, the best option is probably neither, but that's not my main point.
petre 7y ago
> Beef is pretty much as natural as it can come Prions are natural as well. It was recently discovered that Alzheimer's is a double prion disorder but there's no link to meat. Also, a newly discovered prion disease, CWD is killing deer, elk and moose.
kpU8efre7r 7y ago
I haven't seen anyone promote these products as healthy. I see it as more of a treat for people with ethical or environmental concerns with meat. I share these concerns so I try to cut back on meat and these products just give me more options.
- matt-attack 7y ago
  My experience has been different. Me and most of my meat eating friends have been trying and enjoying the Impossible Meat, not for ethical reason, but based on the knee-jerk perception that eating non-meat is healthier than eating meat.
brer 7y ago
the ingredient that gives it the 'meat' 'blood' taste is from genetically modified yeast furthermore, more than 40 other proteins, which are byproducts of the GMO yeast process, which make up part of the soy leghemoglobin product have never been tested on human beings and their safety has never been established. As reported by the NY times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/08/business/impossible-burger-food-meat.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/08/business/impossible-burge... You should not use your gut and microbiome as a petri dish. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fda-casts-doubt-on-safety-of-impossible-burgers-key_b_598de8b7e4b063e2ae057f4a https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fda-casts-doubt-on-safety-of-... This is only the tip of the iceberg with this franken-food https://livingmaxwell.com/impossible-foods-burger-misleading-consumers-fda-rejects-claim-that-it-is-safe-for-consumption https://livingmaxwell.com/impossible-foods-burger-misleading...
YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago
>> Beef is pretty much as natural as it can come, while the 2.0 meat comes from a lab. More to the point, you can subsist just fine on a diet of mostly plant food without having to eat processed stuff that mimicks meat. For instance, check out the many variations of rice and beans eaten around the world (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_and_beans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_and_beans), that are nutritious, filling and delicious and made from ... rice and beans (though rice is often processed, to be fair).
- igetspam 7y ago
  Delicious is subjective. My wife is vegan, so I'm vegan adjacent. I don't really like food (at all) but the things I do like tend to fall into rather simple categories like "meat with salt." I don't enjoy cooked vegetables (raw with ranch, please), don't like cooked fruit (pie... I'll never understand it...), hate tofu in almost all configurations and am really not into beans and rice. It makes my wife's life difficult (I'm always amazed she puts up with me) because she's not only vegan for ethical reasons but she genuinely likes eating that way. The Impossible and Beyond are a blessing. I can eat a burger that tastes pretty close and I don't run afoul of her ethics. Win, win.

currymj 7y ago

my own intuition on this is that making food using complicated industrial processes isn't bad or good in itself. but it is more profitable for many reasons to make food that is sweet, salty, fatty, and calorically dense, and modern manufacturing lets you do this on an unprecedented scale, so it just ends up that in practice "natural", "whole", "slow" etc foods end up being better for you. it seems possible, although likely less profitable, to make highly-processed food that is reasonably healthy.

chrisfosterelli 7y ago

"Processed foods" are not inherently hazardous. In fact, nearly all food we eat is processed food. I presume you're referring to tertiary processed food. The Soylent FAQ[0] has a good way of describing this: > A box of instant macaroni could be unhealthy because it contains low levels of important vitamins and minerals while containing excess amounts of salt, cholesterol, and saturated fat. The macaroni is not inherently unhealthy because it was manufactured in a factory, it’s unhealthy because it lacks vital nutrients that the body needs. [0]: https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002689323-What-makes-Soylent-different-from-other-processed-foods- https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002689323-What-...

torstenvl 7y ago
Yes. But there's a strong enough correlation for it to be beneficial. Most processed foods are processed to add sugars, fats, and sodium to make them more tasty, and to remove fiber to make them easier to eat. You're right that a person shouldn't pre-judge a good based solely on its having been manufactured. But it's also true that someone who generally avoids processed foods will end up avoiding the most unhealthy foods available.
chrisseaton 7y ago
> A box of instant macaroni could be unhealthy because it contains low levels of important vitamins and minerals while containing excess amounts of salt, cholesterol, and saturated fat What macaroni contains cholesterol and saturated fat? And seems unfair to compare macaroni, a plain ingredient usually combined with others, with a complete meal.
- nothrabannosir 7y ago
  From the "instant", I assume they're referring to mac n "cheese", with whatever is passing for the latter containing both of those.
  - chrisseaton 7y ago
    Oh right I guess that's a dish made with macaroni then, and not just the pasta itself, so that's confusing.
    - xeromal 7y ago
      No one on earth eats plain macaroni. You have it mixed with something. lol
      - chrisseaton 7y ago
        Yes it's combined with a sauce or something - meat, tomato, cheese, etc. But then that gives you wildly different nutrition profiles. Just saying 'box of macaroni' doesn't tell you anything.

gregoryexe 7y ago

They'd feed us sawdust if we'd pay for it. As a matter of fact, they used to try just that.

negativegate 7y ago

> Beef is pretty much as natural as it can come It being natural doesn't have any bearing on how healthy it is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

Andrex 7y ago
Thank you. For some reason people tend to think the natural world and the human body are 100% optimized to each other, when the truth is it's still very much an evolutionary work in progress...
chubot 7y ago
Natural doesn't necessarily mean anything, but time-tested does. It's too long to explain here, but people who have read both Michael Pollan and Taleb probably understand what I mean. Nutrition isn't a science on solid ground, and food isn't a linear combination of its nutrients. It's true that "natural" beef might be raised in ways that aren't time-tested (in fact it's very likely given modern farming). But something like Impossible Burger is also guaranteed not to be time-tested. That isn't to say I wouldn't try it, but it's definitely an important difference.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  > Natural doesn't necessarily mean anything, but time-tested does. Being “time-tested” helps, but it’s not necessarily the only thing to keep in mind. Consider that lead was “time-tested” for thousands of years.
  - chubot 7y ago
    I don't really know the history of lead, but I suspect it illustrates the point. There are no traditional foods with lead in them, because people who ate lead would have died, ensuring that the custom didn't survive. However lead paint was a relatively new thing. People didn't have painted walls for thousands of years. It was used for awhile (not sure how long), and then the test of time figured out that it was poisonous. Is there some history you know of where the test of time didn't work? It's almost tautological to be honest. (And tautological does not mean "untrue" :) ) Lead might have been "bad" by modern standards in the past, but there were also hundreds of other things that were worse for mortality, so maybe lead use in certain applications just got noticed in the last century or so.

lkbm 7y ago

I'm vegetarian primarily for animal well-being reasons, and environmental second. Health is merely a nice plus for me. That said, the Beyond Meat burgers and sausages have impressive satiety -- probably due to the high amount of saturated fat. (I only tried the Impossible Burger once, but I assume they're similar.) There's not much evidence, from what I've seen, that being "processed" is a health issue. The main thing is that highly-refined foods frequently have a high calorie-to-satiety ratio and/or are "high-reward", both of which result in over-eating. Beyond Meat, at least, does the opposite for me. I frequently bike 20+ miles on Saturday and/or Sunday, and one thing I've found is that if I eat some Beyond Meat fake meat, I'll later realize that I've burnt 2k+ Calories, eaten maybe a thousand, and still not feel particularly hungry. I actually have to pay attention to eating enough, whereas normally my body is quite eager to ingest 5k+ Calories if I choose the wrong foods. (Veggie soup is maybe more filling, but I can be full and still crave food.) Kielbasa was the meat I missed most when I became vegetarian, and the Beyond Meat italian sausage is the first thing I've had that approaches it. If Impossible Foods can beat that, that's exciting to me.

gnicholas 7y ago
I tried Beyond Meat last night for the first time and was surprised how un-filling it was for me. I ate one and a half burgers with plenty of toppings and was still hungry after. And I'd been snacking before dinner, so I wasn't famished to begin with. The taste was pretty good, but I have to figure I'm eating two burgers ($6 in patties) at a minimum. EDIT: mind sharing why you're downvoting this? Is my experience not relevant?
- dwater 7y ago
  I weigh 140lbs, and eat meat probably 2-3 times a week on average. I eat a regular burger probably once every 3 months or so and it usually knocks me on my ass and makes me feel an extreme level of full as well as very tired (I usually have fries and a beer at the same time). A Beyond burger with cheese and fries shocked me with how similar I felt afterwards, I had it around 7p and struggled to stay awake another 3 hours. I even had a similar feeling of still being satiated when I woke up the next morning like I get from eating a big fatty burger.

fhsga77 7y ago

I think from the ingredient list it's pretty clear that it's not healthy: methylcellulose an indigestible emulsifier and stool softener cultured dextrose fermented sugar used as preservative soy leghemoglobin Actually not from soy, but biofactured by genetically engineered yeast. I don't know all the reasons for its inclusion, but leghemoglobin can be used as red food coloring. I don't consider burgers particularly healthy, but I wouldn't consider the Impossible Burger as a healthy alternative.

Dylan16807 7y ago
methylcellulose "an indigestible emulsifier and stool softener" You have to be joking. Normal cellulose makes up a huge amount of most healthy and completely unprocessed vegetables, is considered great for you, and is also an indigestible emulsifier and stool softener. You can't just name some use that sounds icky and declare that something is bad for you. It's possible that methylating it causes a problem, but these specific reasons are nonsense. "fermented sugar used as preservative" So is alcohol, and it looks like this kind of fermentation typically uses normal cheese bacteria. Shouldn't be an issue for most people. "Actually not from soy, but biofactured by genetically engineered yeast." So what?
saagarjha 7y ago
> I think from the ingredient list it's pretty clear that it's not healthy How did you arrive at this conclusion?
technothrasher 7y ago
You just listed three ingredients and their typical usages. You didn't make any case for why these three ingredients might be unhealthy.
nitrogen 7y ago
leghemoglobin... I don't know all the reasons for its inclusion It's in all the older news about the company and on their website -- that's what makes it look, cook, and taste like meat.

calahad 7y ago

Its about animal cruelty for many people.

amelius 7y ago

> Beef is pretty much as natural as it can come, while the 2.0 meat comes from a lab. Not just from a lab, but those powders which it contains may come from China, where regulations may be lacking.

icegreentea2 7y ago
If you're going to be worried about that, you should be worried about normal sausage too.
- codyb 7y ago
  As a random aside, I picked up a meat grinder for my stand mixer and making my own sausage from super high quality ingredients then freezing a ton was an awesome way to get preservative free, delicious pork and lamb sausage for about three months in a single afternoon. It was maybe a bit much to try ten pounds grinding my first time making but the results were very yum.
sct202 7y ago
The cows your beef comes from are probably eating powders from China in the form of vitamins and antibiotics.
- amelius 7y ago
  Ok, but that is 1 biological filtering step away from eating them directly.
  - unclenoriega 7y ago
    Or perhaps one biological concentrating step.

fisherjeff 7y ago

I actually find that ingredient list surprisingly tame. And I think typically the hazards of processed foods are that they’re made from low quality ingredients, then inundated with salt, sugar, and fat to make them anything from palatable to addictive. Plus a bunch of preservatives for shelf stability.

nathancahill 7y ago

I'd float the idea that health-conscious && (environment-conscious || animal-conscious) often go together. And if you're going to eat "meat", this is a much more environmental and animal friendly option than beef. For the purely health-conscious, the best option is probably neither, but that's not my main point.

petre 7y ago

> Beef is pretty much as natural as it can come Prions are natural as well. It was recently discovered that Alzheimer's is a double prion disorder but there's no link to meat. Also, a newly discovered prion disease, CWD is killing deer, elk and moose.

kpU8efre7r 7y ago

I haven't seen anyone promote these products as healthy. I see it as more of a treat for people with ethical or environmental concerns with meat. I share these concerns so I try to cut back on meat and these products just give me more options.

matt-attack 7y ago
My experience has been different. Me and most of my meat eating friends have been trying and enjoying the Impossible Meat, not for ethical reason, but based on the knee-jerk perception that eating non-meat is healthier than eating meat.

brer 7y ago

the ingredient that gives it the 'meat' 'blood' taste is from genetically modified yeast furthermore, more than 40 other proteins, which are byproducts of the GMO yeast process, which make up part of the soy leghemoglobin product have never been tested on human beings and their safety has never been established. As reported by the NY times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/08/business/impossible-burger-food-meat.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/08/business/impossible-burge... You should not use your gut and microbiome as a petri dish. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fda-casts-doubt-on-safety-of-impossible-burgers-key_b_598de8b7e4b063e2ae057f4a https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fda-casts-doubt-on-safety-of-... This is only the tip of the iceberg with this franken-food https://livingmaxwell.com/impossible-foods-burger-misleading-consumers-fda-rejects-claim-that-it-is-safe-for-consumption https://livingmaxwell.com/impossible-foods-burger-misleading...

YeGoblynQueenne 7y ago

>> Beef is pretty much as natural as it can come, while the 2.0 meat comes from a lab. More to the point, you can subsist just fine on a diet of mostly plant food without having to eat processed stuff that mimicks meat. For instance, check out the many variations of rice and beans eaten around the world (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_and_beans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice_and_beans), that are nutritious, filling and delicious and made from ... rice and beans (though rice is often processed, to be fair).

igetspam 7y ago
Delicious is subjective. My wife is vegan, so I'm vegan adjacent. I don't really like food (at all) but the things I do like tend to fall into rather simple categories like "meat with salt." I don't enjoy cooked vegetables (raw with ranch, please), don't like cooked fruit (pie... I'll never understand it...), hate tofu in almost all configurations and am really not into beans and rice. It makes my wife's life difficult (I'm always amazed she puts up with me) because she's not only vegan for ethical reasons but she genuinely likes eating that way. The Impossible and Beyond are a blessing. I can eat a burger that tastes pretty close and I don't run afoul of her ethics. Win, win.