6 ms·

This seems like something Burger King can be fixed just by mandating a separate broiler in the franchise agreement, showing off the change, and then neglecting

This seems like something Burger King can be fixed just by mandating a separate broiler in the franchise agreement, showing off the change, and then neglecting enforcement until someone complains, at which point Burger King can blame the franchisee

sudosysgen 7y ago
This does raise the question, what is the motivation for these vegans? Is it eliminating animal suffering, reducing global warming as farming is a major polluter, or are they actually just disgusted by animal products in general? As the article hints at, this claim only really makes sense if a sizeable section of the US is completely opposed to animal by-products independent of any ethical, moral or scientific component, just by innate disgust of eating anything that came from an animal. And I do believe the last category to be very fringe and small, and this would also mean being opposed to a large number of medical treatments. Personally, I don't think their claim holds any weight, unintentional cross contamination with beef isn't something the average vegan would find justifiably outrageous in a restaurant that also serves beef, and as far as allergies go anyone that has allergies should be asking around for cross contamination in a restaurant that specializes in what they are allergic from.
- kaikai 7y ago
  There are also people who refrain from eating beef for religious reasons.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- TrentLarr 7y ago
  >Is it eliminating animal suffering, reducing global warming as farming is a major polluter, or are they actually just disgusted by animal products in general? For me, it's both. For others, it's religious. For far fewer, it's health (allergies, intolerances, etc). In all of those cases, if a restaurant advertises their product as meat free, it should be or else it's false advertising. Further complicating the issue is that burger king has for years sold a veggie patty that is heated in the microwave - using separate tools and is "contamination free". So anyways, if they want to advertise meat-free, then it should be a meat-free product that is served to you.
- jka 7y ago
  The case was raised by an individual plaintiff, but in general vegans have a variety of different reasons not to want to encourage farming of animals. Some of those include discomfort with eating animals and their byproducts, as you mention -- for others, it's based on a desire to encourage more sustainable environmentally-friendly food options. For some subset of the spectrum mentioned, cross-contamination is an important issue - and for the rest, it may be acceptable under some circumstances, but there's no downside to removal of contamination, so they'd likely support it given the choice.
  - presto8 7y ago
    > but there's no downside to removal of contamination, so they'd likely support it given the choice. There may be a downside, if the cost of compliance is too high and the business decides to stop offering the product.
    - jka 7y ago
      I think I understand what you're saying, but could you elaborate on it to make clear who suffers the downside and why?
  - senectus1 7y ago
    I visited a strictly vegan Indian restaurant once, there was a huge kerfuffle that night because some diners had brought a baby in and was spoon feeding the child baby food from a jar that was not vegan. This wasn't the issue... the issue was that the spoon was the restaurants spoon. Their religious convictions deemed that spoon now "violated". They threw the family out and made them pay for the cutlery as well. If they'd used their own cutlery there would not have anywhere near as much animosity. I see this sort of behavior as irrational. But I dont live these peoples lives and dont believe what they believe. I just liked their food :-P
    - learc83 7y ago
      Why in the world did the family pay for the spoon? I mean I might have offered if someone had politely informed me about what I'd done. But I'm certainly not going to of it's a demand.
- Angostura 7y ago
  Vegans have a variety of motivations and yes - some are disgusted by animal products. I have a number of vege friends and for some of them, I make sure, when barbecuing to use a separate grill and tongs. Others don't really care.
  - Turing_Machine 7y ago
    > Vegans have a variety of motivations and yes - some are disgusted by animal products. I find it hard to believe that such a person would willingly go inside a Burger King in the first place. I mean, every surface in one of those places is eventually coated with a layer of grease, right?
    - senectus1 7y ago
      Thats kinda the point I think. They cant claim Vegan if there is animal product in and on it.
      - learc83 7y ago
        But what percent? I mean if a fly lands in it? Human sweat? What about insect parts in grain.
      - Turing_Machine 7y ago
        >> They cant claim Vegan if there is animal product in and on it. Then there's really no such thing as "vegan". All fruits, vegetables, grains, flours...have a certain number of insects in or on them (especially if they're organic). It would be possible to have some definition like the one for Kosher rules (fundamentally, less than 1 part in 60 doesn't count, though there are many nuances on top of that), but 100% absence of animal products is simply not possible.
    - Angostura 7y ago
      > I find it hard to believe that such a person would willingly go inside a Burger King in the first place. You may well fid it hard to be believe, but vegans actually have meat eating friends and may be accepting of other people's dietary choices, and may want to socialise with them - without putting meat products in their mouths.
- bduerst 7y ago
  Why single out and question veganism specifically? Wouldn't vegetarians, religious folks, and alpha-gal syndrome sufferers also want a zero animal-product burger? The market is pretty diverse for this demand.
  - learc83 7y ago
    Because the article was specifically about a vegan?
  - sudosysgen 7y ago
    For religious people, there is really no sense to be made out of it. I say this as a Muslim. I did address alpha-gal by saying that those who have allergies should be mindful of cross contamination in restaurants that serve the stuff they are allergic to.
- 7952 7y ago
  Food is an area where most people have strong personal preferences. It may not be entirely consistent or logical. It is based on taste, both physical and emotional. Why should we expect vegans to be any different?
kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
These machines are sizeable and you can't just retrofit every existing store by fiat. Then, why shouldn't other special interest groups with dietary restrictions be able to impose their will too? We can have a flame broiler with separate meatatarian, vegan, halal, kosher, and hindu conveyors, all with their own exhaust management to ensure harmful vapors don't migrate where they would contaminate the other product lines.
- cookie_monsta 7y ago
  Sure, and if BK decides to market specifically to people with meatatarian, vegan, halal, kosher, and hindu dietary requirements you would expect them to actually deliver, not just pay lip service - the same as any other offer in the marketplace. This "impossible burger" isn't the result of vegans picketing BK HQ - it's a marketing ploy by BK... how are vegans being painted as the bad guys here?
  - LegitShady 7y ago
    Because suddenly to make them happy each store requires thousands of dollars in new equipment. It's not just offering the product it's requiring a separate process for it that costs money to each franchisee The impossible burger is a product. The demands are the result of these people not impossible burger
    - cookie_monsta 7y ago
      Well, let's extend that argument out to the marketplace: Any company can make any claim they want about their products and then if it becomes too expensive to actually deliver that product they can swap in something inferior and in fact contrary to the original offer. This is a problem between BK management and the franchises. You can't blame the consumer for expecting to receive the product as advertised. If it's too complicated to produce, don't offer it.
      - learc83 7y ago
        If it rounds down to 0, most marketing is allowed some margin of error. You can put 0 grams fat per serving on a product that actually has 0.01 grams of fat. If a vegan restaurant advertises 0% animal products I guarantee that is also incorrect. There is some small percentage of insect parts in almost everything. Obviously there is some margin.

sudosysgen 7y ago

This does raise the question, what is the motivation for these vegans? Is it eliminating animal suffering, reducing global warming as farming is a major polluter, or are they actually just disgusted by animal products in general? As the article hints at, this claim only really makes sense if a sizeable section of the US is completely opposed to animal by-products independent of any ethical, moral or scientific component, just by innate disgust of eating anything that came from an animal. And I do believe the last category to be very fringe and small, and this would also mean being opposed to a large number of medical treatments. Personally, I don't think their claim holds any weight, unintentional cross contamination with beef isn't something the average vegan would find justifiably outrageous in a restaurant that also serves beef, and as far as allergies go anyone that has allergies should be asking around for cross contamination in a restaurant that specializes in what they are allergic from.

kaikai 7y ago
There are also people who refrain from eating beef for religious reasons.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
TrentLarr 7y ago
>Is it eliminating animal suffering, reducing global warming as farming is a major polluter, or are they actually just disgusted by animal products in general? For me, it's both. For others, it's religious. For far fewer, it's health (allergies, intolerances, etc). In all of those cases, if a restaurant advertises their product as meat free, it should be or else it's false advertising. Further complicating the issue is that burger king has for years sold a veggie patty that is heated in the microwave - using separate tools and is "contamination free". So anyways, if they want to advertise meat-free, then it should be a meat-free product that is served to you.
jka 7y ago
The case was raised by an individual plaintiff, but in general vegans have a variety of different reasons not to want to encourage farming of animals. Some of those include discomfort with eating animals and their byproducts, as you mention -- for others, it's based on a desire to encourage more sustainable environmentally-friendly food options. For some subset of the spectrum mentioned, cross-contamination is an important issue - and for the rest, it may be acceptable under some circumstances, but there's no downside to removal of contamination, so they'd likely support it given the choice.
- presto8 7y ago
  > but there's no downside to removal of contamination, so they'd likely support it given the choice. There may be a downside, if the cost of compliance is too high and the business decides to stop offering the product.
  - jka 7y ago
    I think I understand what you're saying, but could you elaborate on it to make clear who suffers the downside and why?
- senectus1 7y ago
  I visited a strictly vegan Indian restaurant once, there was a huge kerfuffle that night because some diners had brought a baby in and was spoon feeding the child baby food from a jar that was not vegan. This wasn't the issue... the issue was that the spoon was the restaurants spoon. Their religious convictions deemed that spoon now "violated". They threw the family out and made them pay for the cutlery as well. If they'd used their own cutlery there would not have anywhere near as much animosity. I see this sort of behavior as irrational. But I dont live these peoples lives and dont believe what they believe. I just liked their food :-P
  - learc83 7y ago
    Why in the world did the family pay for the spoon? I mean I might have offered if someone had politely informed me about what I'd done. But I'm certainly not going to of it's a demand.
Angostura 7y ago
Vegans have a variety of motivations and yes - some are disgusted by animal products. I have a number of vege friends and for some of them, I make sure, when barbecuing to use a separate grill and tongs. Others don't really care.
- Turing_Machine 7y ago
  > Vegans have a variety of motivations and yes - some are disgusted by animal products. I find it hard to believe that such a person would willingly go inside a Burger King in the first place. I mean, every surface in one of those places is eventually coated with a layer of grease, right?
  - senectus1 7y ago
    Thats kinda the point I think. They cant claim Vegan if there is animal product in and on it.
    - learc83 7y ago
      But what percent? I mean if a fly lands in it? Human sweat? What about insect parts in grain.
    - Turing_Machine 7y ago
      >> They cant claim Vegan if there is animal product in and on it. Then there's really no such thing as "vegan". All fruits, vegetables, grains, flours...have a certain number of insects in or on them (especially if they're organic). It would be possible to have some definition like the one for Kosher rules (fundamentally, less than 1 part in 60 doesn't count, though there are many nuances on top of that), but 100% absence of animal products is simply not possible.
  - Angostura 7y ago
    > I find it hard to believe that such a person would willingly go inside a Burger King in the first place. You may well fid it hard to be believe, but vegans actually have meat eating friends and may be accepting of other people's dietary choices, and may want to socialise with them - without putting meat products in their mouths.
bduerst 7y ago
Why single out and question veganism specifically? Wouldn't vegetarians, religious folks, and alpha-gal syndrome sufferers also want a zero animal-product burger? The market is pretty diverse for this demand.
- learc83 7y ago
  Because the article was specifically about a vegan?
- sudosysgen 7y ago
  For religious people, there is really no sense to be made out of it. I say this as a Muslim. I did address alpha-gal by saying that those who have allergies should be mindful of cross contamination in restaurants that serve the stuff they are allergic to.
7952 7y ago
Food is an area where most people have strong personal preferences. It may not be entirely consistent or logical. It is based on taste, both physical and emotional. Why should we expect vegans to be any different?

kevin_thibedeau 7y ago

These machines are sizeable and you can't just retrofit every existing store by fiat. Then, why shouldn't other special interest groups with dietary restrictions be able to impose their will too? We can have a flame broiler with separate meatatarian, vegan, halal, kosher, and hindu conveyors, all with their own exhaust management to ensure harmful vapors don't migrate where they would contaminate the other product lines.

cookie_monsta 7y ago
Sure, and if BK decides to market specifically to people with meatatarian, vegan, halal, kosher, and hindu dietary requirements you would expect them to actually deliver, not just pay lip service - the same as any other offer in the marketplace. This "impossible burger" isn't the result of vegans picketing BK HQ - it's a marketing ploy by BK... how are vegans being painted as the bad guys here?
- LegitShady 7y ago
  Because suddenly to make them happy each store requires thousands of dollars in new equipment. It's not just offering the product it's requiring a separate process for it that costs money to each franchisee The impossible burger is a product. The demands are the result of these people not impossible burger
  - cookie_monsta 7y ago
    Well, let's extend that argument out to the marketplace: Any company can make any claim they want about their products and then if it becomes too expensive to actually deliver that product they can swap in something inferior and in fact contrary to the original offer. This is a problem between BK management and the franchises. You can't blame the consumer for expecting to receive the product as advertised. If it's too complicated to produce, don't offer it.
    - learc83 7y ago
      If it rounds down to 0, most marketing is allowed some margin of error. You can put 0 grams fat per serving on a product that actually has 0.01 grams of fat. If a vegan restaurant advertises 0% animal products I guarantee that is also incorrect. There is some small percentage of insect parts in almost everything. Obviously there is some margin.