3 ms·
It shouldn’t be. Either way, it’s not the main reason that people (like myself) are clamoring for plant-based meat alternatives that recreate the meat-eating ex
by x3haloed 7y ago
It shouldn’t be. Either way, it’s not the main reason that people (like myself) are clamoring for plant-based meat alternatives that recreate the meat-eating experience. pkulak is right. It’s to prevent animal cruelty and help the environment.
The constant daily reminder from the media that Impossible Burgers aren’t any healthier than real burgers are an irrelevant distraction from the point. Animals don’t have to be slaughtered to enjoy a hamburger if it’s an Impossible burger. The only way to dispute that is if you claim that Impossible Burgers aren’t as good as a real one, and dammit if Impossible hasn’t done an incredible job at making a tasty burger out of freakin plants.
- loceng 7y agoCan you cite research to contrast the fairly well-known unsustainable agriculture practices that industrial complexes have lead to for plant based? I've yet to see an adequately done comparison between properly managed agriculture and properly managed meat production, e.g. non-monocrops vs. non-factory farming.
- loceng 7y agoHoping whoever downvoted me leaves a qualitative comment.
- ramphastidae 7y ago> Animals don’t have to be slaughtered to enjoy a hamburger if it’s an Impossible burger. I realize this is a bit extreme of a characterization, but this argument doesn't sit right with me at all. It sounds like 'I'm only willing to change my habits to reduce animal cruelty and help the environment if an alternative that tastes exactly like meat exists. Otherwise, what can possibly be done?!' If you are really concerned about those things, whether the Impossible Burger exists or not should not make a difference. There are plenty of delicious vegetable burgers that already exist. They just taste like the ingredients they are made of (beans, mushrooms, etc.) and not a faux replica of meat.