17 ms·

This is what grinds my gears. For years scientists and health professionals are repeating over and over "don't eat hyper processed foods" and the moment someone

by dvh 5y ago

This is what grinds my gears. For years scientists and health professionals are repeating over and over "don't eat hyper processed foods" and the moment someone invents artificial meat everybody loses their fucking mind and munch on it like strawberries. You want proteins? Eat lentils and beans and once a week chicken or fish. Artificial meat is the stupidest invention in last 50 years. Don't eat artificial meat! There's literally nothing good that can came from it, eat moderately instead.

FpUser 5y ago
>"Eat lentils and beans" Not that I do not like those but eating those in any reasonable amount for more than one day in a row is causing very strong heartburn sensation for me. So thanks bot no. >"eat moderately instead." I am very physically active (2-3 hour of daily physical activity) and have decent amount of muscle. How the fuck am I supposed to "eat moderately"? My main daily diet is greens with tomatoes and chicken/meat/fish.
automatic6131 5y ago
You're right, but also people really, really like meat. And they'll continue to want to eat it a great deal. Very, very few people would willingly choose bean caserole over steak and chips more than even 10% of the time.
danuker 5y ago
> Eat lentils and beans Absolutely. Legumes are the healthiest sources of protein. While it takes a week or two for the gut to adjust (and be the butt of gas jokes), it extends your healthy lifespan, so it's worth it. Here is what a non-profit that I follow has to say: https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/legumes/ https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/legumes/
- jseban 5y ago
  They are still not complete proteins like every animal protein is, so you need to figure out combinations that can theoretically make a complete protein. And the protein content is still going to be much lower than meat. Protein is already the hardest to get enough of, it's always easy to eat carbs and fat, which people already do too much. And if something is hard to digest, common sense says that it's probably not utilised as well by the body either. In practice it really makes a big different, to eat 100 grams of chicken for dinner, compared to 200 grams of lentils. Most people that eat plant based compensate with eating more fat to get the satiety per gram of food higher, which leads to an unhealthy diet. It would be much simpler if plants had complete protein in the same amount as animal protein sources, but it's way off.
  - throwawaycuriou 5y ago
    Could you elaborate on what makes a protein complete?
    - jseban 5y ago
      It contains all of the essential amino acids.
      - yissp 5y ago
        Legumes do contain all of the essential amino acids, just not in the ideal ratio. Specifically, I believe they're low in methionine.
    - Wildgoose 5y ago
      "Protein" is actually a large number of different amino acids, most of which our bodies can manufacture. Our bodies can't manufacture nine of those amino acids, we have to ingest them, and also in the appropriate amounts. Eggs have all 9 essential amino acids and also in almost exactly the proportions we need them in, making eggs a fantastic source of protein. In general, legumes and grains individually are not complete proteins, but are when the two are combined. Hence rice and lentil dahl, or baked beans on toast. The combination makes complete protein.
      - danuker 5y ago
        > making eggs a fantastic source of protein Too bad they come in a package with cholesterol and choline. https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/eggs/ https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/eggs/ I'd rather eat beans and whole bread. https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth/
    - danuker 5y ago
      Here is what this non-profit that reviews science has to say: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth/
- GhettoComputers 5y ago
  They dry out my skin when I eat them in any significant amount. They also have toxins to your body. Sprouting them removes this issue, but they change the way they’re consumed.
- mint2 5y ago
  That two week thing is a generalizations. Some people have more sensitivity to fodmaps.
- lupire 5y ago
  That's the website of a vegan activist (and doctor) who refuses to acknowledge any health benefits of animal food. It's not neutral science-driven organization, despite masquerading as one. Dr Greger even goes to the cognitive dissonance of claiming that whole food plant-based are the healthiest, while also telling people to buy processed supplements. https://nutritionfacts.org/about/ https://nutritionfacts.org/about/ https://nutritionfacts.org/questions/vitamin-b12-deficiency-symptoms-treatment/ https://nutritionfacts.org/questions/vitamin-b12-deficiency-... Disclaimer: I am vegan, but I also believe in honesty.
tetris11 5y ago
The idea isn't meant to appeal to us, as neither you nor I consume fastfood enough for it to matter. But plenty of people do, and it drives the meat markets whose over abundance of meat related products drive other markets that keep this horrible cycle of slaughter going. Weaning people off meat at the fast food level is great way to start IMO.
dTal 5y ago
Where are you getting that chicken or fish from? Are you quite comfortable with the story of how it got to be on your plate?
- mauvehaus 5y ago
  Not the person you're replying to, but I've helped process chickens half a dozen or so times. The smell puts me off eating chicken for a week or so, but overall the answer to your question has a lot of nuance. Broadly speaking yes. On the other hand, I definitely eat less meat when I don't how it was raised and slaughtered. I'm no saint: I had a fast food burrito last night while traveling, but I certainly try to eat less meat that comes to me by a long supply chain that hides any sense of accountability for the well-being of the animal from the consumer. Let's also not forget the human cost of industrially produced meat. If there's one thing the pandemic should have taught us, it's that animal processing is a job people do under fairly challenging conditions, for which many of them are poorly paid, and some of them aren't in a good position to advocate for change because of their immigration status. And this is the problem with industrial agriculture. All of the good or bad practices that go into bringing food to our plates is abstracted away such that we don't have to think about them or hold ourselves to account for them. Am I comfortable with how those chickens I help process come to my plate? Absolutely, and without reservations. The sausage from the local farm we patronize? Yup! The pork in that burrito last night? A lot less so, but I was hungry and needed a meal quick. The burger at McDonald's? Nope. That's why I drove by it and hit the burrito place instead.
sph 5y ago
I know it's become taboo to admit to eat real meat from an animal but this is my same concern. Processed food of any nature completely destroys me, and is the cause of my IBS, and I will stay away from any form of processed meat. Being vegetarian or worse vegan doesn't work with me and my health. I strongly believe there's much better ways of improving the status quo and being carbon neutral than buying meat built in a factory by a chemical conglomerate that uses vegetables and legume proteins flown from the other side of the world. So much for being "green". I spend 3x in meat than the average Joe because I buy 90% of it from local, family-owned organic farms and as long as I can afford it I will keep doing so, I will keep eating meat because my body requires it and functions the best on it, and trying to push processed fake meat as the future is being blind and obtuse to why people actually eat meat. No it's not because they're just stupid and ignorant and are climate skeptics. If obesity and health issues have become such an epidemic because most of our food is processed, I am terrified to see how much worse we'll be when more political and economical resources are invested towards even more processed junk food.
- lupire 5y ago
  How do you define "processed food of any nature"? Do you cook (process) your meat? Do you recommend a diet high in unprocessed sugar?
detaro 5y ago
The only people loosing their mind over it seem to be the ones railing against it.
- huetius 5y ago
  Well, several posters in this thread have made it clear that they intend to replace real meat with fake meat over any objections. I think this is reasonable to be upset about. For many of us, this seems like another example of the affluent, technological society causing us a problem, then selling us a solution, which will inevitably cause more problems, and etc. Perhaps the problem is not that humans eat meat, but rather something at the ideal level of this society, causing it to act in this way over and over again, despite the cascade of self-inflicted crises that it has no hope of solving…
  - benchaney 5y ago
    > Well, several posters in this thread have made it clear that they intend to replace real meat with fake meat over any objections. I think this is reasonable to be upset about. …why? I don’t see why you should care at all. It doesn’t affect you. Not even a little bit. The anti fake meat hysteria has gotten to be just as dramatic as militant veganism, but it doesn’t even have any ethical implications to justify strong emotions.
7952 5y ago
None of these rules are 100% true. "Natural" food can be bad for you, and processed food good. It is just a heuristic that works somewhat well when you have limited information.
quitit 5y ago
“Processed foods” is a catch all term for what is generally known as junk food - food that is nutritionally poor and often has unhealthy quantities of flavour-enhancing ingredients that are known to be a problem in excess such as saturated fats, salt, sugar etc. However being against a food for merely being “processed” is essential-oils level of pseudo-science. Frankly it’s baseless fear-mongering and entirely ignorant to the understanding of nutrition. These foods are being made by the same scientific community which decries the junk food - the same people whose view you support. There is no reason not to engage an artificially made food replacement which is both sufficiently enjoyable and nutritious. This especially so when they address the significant issues of food-supply contributions to water scarcity, climate change and antibiotic resistance. Artificially grown meat will also be better for you - not just nutritionally but also because it doesn’t fall victim to the weaknesses in the food supply industry (disease/food poisoning/contamination.) Also “everyone munches on it like strawberries” - the foods in question are either still in development or low supply. There is a lot of strawman going on here.
- hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
  I find the first two sentences of your post incoherent. If, as you say, processed food equals junk food, being against it doesn't seem pseud-science to me. You probably meant the term "processed foods" is being used imprecisely to mean "junk food" which is true: the large set of processed foods contains both junk food as well as other kinds of food, some of them being processed by their very nature (like cheese - you can't have "unprocessed cheese"). I wish people stopped using the imprecise phrase "processed foods" and concentrate on the overall effect on one's health. Because singling out any particular component will get you false negatives. Olive oil - high in calories. Feta cheese - high in sodium (and yet, it has an overall good effect on one's cardiac health). Red wine - bad because of alcohol. It's only when you look at the whole you can make a meaningful decision. Yes, it's more difficult and people prefer simple decisions. But your health is worth it.
  - quitit 5y ago
    The comprehension issue at hand is that you’ve ignored the quotation marks around “processed foods”, thus you’ve lost the reference to the parent comment which the statement was in reply to. However you have come good and realised that I was indeed taking issue with the words being used as an improper stand-in for foods which merely have poor nutritional content.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
pessimizer 5y ago
Artificial meat is the most important thing anyone could be working on right now. Convincing, nutritious, cheap artificial meat could turn the world vegetarian. This would have radical effects on the environment, the climate, and obviate the need to kill billions of animals every year. "don't eat hyper processed foods" is a horseshit shorthand. It's types of processing that are problems, not the simple fact that food has been prepared. Sometimes I'll cook a dish with a lot of steps at home; am I supposed to assume that the 10-step food I cook at home is less healthy than the 2-step? > eat moderately This literally doesn't mean anything. Moderate is not an amount, or a composition.
- GhettoComputers 5y ago
  No it won’t. Tofu has existed for centuries and it didn’t, impossible burgers didn’t. It’s hopeful, but in reality it’ll just give industrialized countries with poorer people less access to animal products, while those in 3rd world countries continue to grow chickens.
  - Zababa 5y ago
    Neither tofu nor impossible burgers are a convincing replacement of a real piece of meat. They are replacement for processed meat.
    - GhettoComputers 5y ago
      Sure, neither of them are ribeye equivalents. But at what cost will people pay for the the fake foods, and what issues will they bring? I'm actually very fond of quorn (with egg white) which I could be convinced is a 1:1 piece of chicken.
- debacle 5y ago
  > Convincing, nutritious, cheap artificial meat could turn the world vegetarian. Which part of the world? The US? Eastern Europe? South America? The barrier to "convincing" and "cheap" are very high.
lr4444lr 5y ago
I like the sentiment, but I'm an unrepentant "animal flesh once a day" on most days kinda guy, and various health markers all point to that working well for me. The real issue to me is the branding: too many people think that just because a fancy label touts locally sourced organic whatnot that the product is automatically healthier than store-branded simple foods.
liveoneggs 5y ago
yeah but what if you take those lentils (or split peas), grind them into a powder, add tons of salt, color them with brown stuff, add juice to simulate blood, and then glue them into the shape of a hamburger?
herbst 5y ago
I like Quorn, I've eaten some nice tofu and really good saitan. I really like black bean burgers too. However every single actual fake meat I tried so far was sitting wrong in my stomach. Maybe one gets used to it, who knows. The whole topic is also skewed. In Switzerland 2/3 of the land are basically non useable. This land is only used to feed cows, which makes up 95% of the diet of a organic local cow. There is no way we could grow anything useful on this land, especially not without destroying the nature.
- Balero 5y ago
  You could argue that instead of using that land for grazing, it should be allowed to go wild again, helping to improve the nature. It is still usable by other species than humans and cattle. This would likely change the landscape and make the countryside look different. So there is a question about whether you want to change back to the 'original natural' landscape, or keep the cow managed 'agricultural-natural' landscape. There is a a similar discussion happening in the UK about re-wilding some moorland, should it be kept in it's current tree-less state, for grouse shooting and not particularly economical sheep grazing, or be reverted to a 'pre-human' state of forest. Only it has been the moorland for hundreds and hundreds of years, and it would actually take some intervention in some places to change to a forest due to the grazing by deer and lack of predators (due to humans killing them all). Personally I think there is room for both keeping some, and letting/helping some go wild.
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
Meat tastes good. I want to keep eating it.
- TheCondor 5y ago
  We bought a half cattle from a local organic farmer. It’s not ultra green, but there was no fertilizer and fairly minimal transport carbon. And it keeps the money local. We are a family of four and I fully expect it to last 18+ months, pretty easily. Additionally, you can get it aged if you work with the processor. It was a very interesting experience, we learned a lot and will do it again. Check out eatwild.com to find a rancher near you.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    Sounds interesting. I will check that out. Thanks.
- phonypc 5y ago
  If you knew human flesh to be the most tasty substance on Earth, would you want to keep eating it? (No, obviously eating people is not equivalent on all levels to eating non-human animals. But merely tasting good isn't a very sensible reason to eat something on its own)
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    I can find non-human animal meat for sale at the grocery store.
    - ben_w 5y ago
      That’s not relevant to the question asked. For some people, meat is a moral issue that makes the literal holocaust look like a one-off homicide, and must be utterly eliminated. (Personally, given what I believe about the nature of minds, I suspect the moral issue varies by species; but the number of dead is that order of magnitude). Other people believe it to be a mere personal health issue, which is basically just “you do you, none of my business”. Other people say the environmental consequences of meat production affect us all, and therefore needs to be minimised: here, if everyone wants it but only the super-rich can afford it, that’s still a win.
lqet 5y ago
I have mentioned this several times in comments on other threads, and each time my comment was buried under variations of the same argument: the vast majority of people cannot be expected to give up meat, and therefore to help both the environment and their health, and to stop killing animals, we should offer them artificial meat. But I very much doubt that the additional crazy overhead of producing and packing and shipping this artificial meat (which as you said is completely unnecessary, as you can just start eating non-hyper-processed vegetables) will result in a net benefit for the planet, or for your personal health. Another thing that concerns me is the centralization aspect. It is still fairly easy to buy meat coming from your local butcher / local animals. Looking at the ingredients of some of this artificial meat, I fail to see how it should be produced by a local shop. You need a supply chain, and possibly special machinery. This may only be carried out by large companies.
- windexh8er 5y ago
  Most of the "real" processed meat has more overhead than its counterparts. Most people do not buy from a local butcher, to imply otherwise is turning a blind eye. They buy big brand overly processed "meat" that comes in a cardboard box wrapped in plastic just the same. With respect to "crazy overhead" animals require land, food and water at an exponential rate of consumption compared to alternatives. They also taint and pollute groundwater sources and contribute to a significant amount of food recalls due to the above. Lastly in the metro I live there are about a half dozen alt meat "butcher" shops that supply alt meats to consumers and local restaurants. They're insanely popular and have been for over 5 years now. There's great brand recognition of those alt meats on local menus. You don't often see that with "real" meat because there's not as much differentiation in the product in real meats, just price. A lot of the above points are simply ignoring facts and the market. Hopefully, like with EVs, more people can continue to make positive progress and acceptance with alternatives to real meats as we've been seeing.
  - lqet 5y ago
    > With respect to "crazy overhead" animals require land, food and water at an exponential rate of consumption compared to alternatives. Why is the overhead exponential in the rate of consumption?
windexh8er 5y ago
> ...and the moment someone invents artificial meat everybody loses their fucking mind and munch on it like strawberries. This is not exclusively a bad thing as is implied. For some it will be their endgame, but for others it will be a transition. In our household veggie "burgers" are more common than fake/alt meats. But fake meats have largely displaced the real thing. For example a commonly requested menu item is buffalo chicken dip. The family simply refers to it as "fake chicken dip" and that's been normalized over the last few years. We've transitioned from smoking, grilling, sous vide and other methods of traditional meat cooking multiple times a week to a request once or twice a month for real bacon and around the holidays a brined and smoked turkey breast. Fish is another story, nobody's giving up sushi anytime soon. But overall we enjoy it, and it's a net positive in many other ways. We've served other family members homemade burgers (not preformed) using off the shelf alt "hamburger meat" and they've taken to making them in their homes after enjoying them. In many ways there's not much health gain currently, but - again it's a great transitory step for many.
- GhettoComputers 5y ago
  It’s more expensive, less healthy, and relies on tricking people they’re eating a more nutritious food than they are, who benefits aside from corporations? If you told people which is real and fake, you think it’ll still be wanted?
globular-toast 5y ago
"Processed" actually has a specific meaning, though. It generally refers to the addition of some kind of salt or smoking. So cured meats, sausages, bacon etc. These are processed foods. It doesn't generally mean stuff that isn't "natural". Do you really think meat from factory farms is "natural" anyway?
kcplate 5y ago
Feel free to grow my meat in a lab, as long as that lab is full of living cows, chickens, turkey, deer, pigs, lambs, and fish.

by dvh 5y ago

FpUser 5y ago

>"Eat lentils and beans" Not that I do not like those but eating those in any reasonable amount for more than one day in a row is causing very strong heartburn sensation for me. So thanks bot no. >"eat moderately instead." I am very physically active (2-3 hour of daily physical activity) and have decent amount of muscle. How the fuck am I supposed to "eat moderately"? My main daily diet is greens with tomatoes and chicken/meat/fish.

automatic6131 5y ago

You're right, but also people really, really like meat. And they'll continue to want to eat it a great deal. Very, very few people would willingly choose bean caserole over steak and chips more than even 10% of the time.

danuker 5y ago

> Eat lentils and beans Absolutely. Legumes are the healthiest sources of protein. While it takes a week or two for the gut to adjust (and be the butt of gas jokes), it extends your healthy lifespan, so it's worth it. Here is what a non-profit that I follow has to say: https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/legumes/ https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/legumes/

jseban 5y ago
They are still not complete proteins like every animal protein is, so you need to figure out combinations that can theoretically make a complete protein. And the protein content is still going to be much lower than meat. Protein is already the hardest to get enough of, it's always easy to eat carbs and fat, which people already do too much. And if something is hard to digest, common sense says that it's probably not utilised as well by the body either. In practice it really makes a big different, to eat 100 grams of chicken for dinner, compared to 200 grams of lentils. Most people that eat plant based compensate with eating more fat to get the satiety per gram of food higher, which leads to an unhealthy diet. It would be much simpler if plants had complete protein in the same amount as animal protein sources, but it's way off.
- throwawaycuriou 5y ago
  Could you elaborate on what makes a protein complete?
  - jseban 5y ago
    It contains all of the essential amino acids.
    - yissp 5y ago
      Legumes do contain all of the essential amino acids, just not in the ideal ratio. Specifically, I believe they're low in methionine.
  - Wildgoose 5y ago
    "Protein" is actually a large number of different amino acids, most of which our bodies can manufacture. Our bodies can't manufacture nine of those amino acids, we have to ingest them, and also in the appropriate amounts. Eggs have all 9 essential amino acids and also in almost exactly the proportions we need them in, making eggs a fantastic source of protein. In general, legumes and grains individually are not complete proteins, but are when the two are combined. Hence rice and lentil dahl, or baked beans on toast. The combination makes complete protein.
    - danuker 5y ago
      > making eggs a fantastic source of protein Too bad they come in a package with cholesterol and choline. https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/eggs/ https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/eggs/ I'd rather eat beans and whole bread. https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth/
  - danuker 5y ago
    Here is what this non-profit that reviews science has to say: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth/
GhettoComputers 5y ago
They dry out my skin when I eat them in any significant amount. They also have toxins to your body. Sprouting them removes this issue, but they change the way they’re consumed.
mint2 5y ago
That two week thing is a generalizations. Some people have more sensitivity to fodmaps.
lupire 5y ago
That's the website of a vegan activist (and doctor) who refuses to acknowledge any health benefits of animal food. It's not neutral science-driven organization, despite masquerading as one. Dr Greger even goes to the cognitive dissonance of claiming that whole food plant-based are the healthiest, while also telling people to buy processed supplements. https://nutritionfacts.org/about/ https://nutritionfacts.org/about/ https://nutritionfacts.org/questions/vitamin-b12-deficiency-symptoms-treatment/ https://nutritionfacts.org/questions/vitamin-b12-deficiency-... Disclaimer: I am vegan, but I also believe in honesty.

tetris11 5y ago

The idea isn't meant to appeal to us, as neither you nor I consume fastfood enough for it to matter. But plenty of people do, and it drives the meat markets whose over abundance of meat related products drive other markets that keep this horrible cycle of slaughter going. Weaning people off meat at the fast food level is great way to start IMO.

dTal 5y ago

Where are you getting that chicken or fish from? Are you quite comfortable with the story of how it got to be on your plate?

mauvehaus 5y ago
Not the person you're replying to, but I've helped process chickens half a dozen or so times. The smell puts me off eating chicken for a week or so, but overall the answer to your question has a lot of nuance. Broadly speaking yes. On the other hand, I definitely eat less meat when I don't how it was raised and slaughtered. I'm no saint: I had a fast food burrito last night while traveling, but I certainly try to eat less meat that comes to me by a long supply chain that hides any sense of accountability for the well-being of the animal from the consumer. Let's also not forget the human cost of industrially produced meat. If there's one thing the pandemic should have taught us, it's that animal processing is a job people do under fairly challenging conditions, for which many of them are poorly paid, and some of them aren't in a good position to advocate for change because of their immigration status. And this is the problem with industrial agriculture. All of the good or bad practices that go into bringing food to our plates is abstracted away such that we don't have to think about them or hold ourselves to account for them. Am I comfortable with how those chickens I help process come to my plate? Absolutely, and without reservations. The sausage from the local farm we patronize? Yup! The pork in that burrito last night? A lot less so, but I was hungry and needed a meal quick. The burger at McDonald's? Nope. That's why I drove by it and hit the burrito place instead.

sph 5y ago

I know it's become taboo to admit to eat real meat from an animal but this is my same concern. Processed food of any nature completely destroys me, and is the cause of my IBS, and I will stay away from any form of processed meat. Being vegetarian or worse vegan doesn't work with me and my health. I strongly believe there's much better ways of improving the status quo and being carbon neutral than buying meat built in a factory by a chemical conglomerate that uses vegetables and legume proteins flown from the other side of the world. So much for being "green". I spend 3x in meat than the average Joe because I buy 90% of it from local, family-owned organic farms and as long as I can afford it I will keep doing so, I will keep eating meat because my body requires it and functions the best on it, and trying to push processed fake meat as the future is being blind and obtuse to why people actually eat meat. No it's not because they're just stupid and ignorant and are climate skeptics. If obesity and health issues have become such an epidemic because most of our food is processed, I am terrified to see how much worse we'll be when more political and economical resources are invested towards even more processed junk food.

lupire 5y ago
How do you define "processed food of any nature"? Do you cook (process) your meat? Do you recommend a diet high in unprocessed sugar?

detaro 5y ago

The only people loosing their mind over it seem to be the ones railing against it.

huetius 5y ago
Well, several posters in this thread have made it clear that they intend to replace real meat with fake meat over any objections. I think this is reasonable to be upset about. For many of us, this seems like another example of the affluent, technological society causing us a problem, then selling us a solution, which will inevitably cause more problems, and etc. Perhaps the problem is not that humans eat meat, but rather something at the ideal level of this society, causing it to act in this way over and over again, despite the cascade of self-inflicted crises that it has no hope of solving…
- benchaney 5y ago
  > Well, several posters in this thread have made it clear that they intend to replace real meat with fake meat over any objections. I think this is reasonable to be upset about. …why? I don’t see why you should care at all. It doesn’t affect you. Not even a little bit. The anti fake meat hysteria has gotten to be just as dramatic as militant veganism, but it doesn’t even have any ethical implications to justify strong emotions.

7952 5y ago

None of these rules are 100% true. "Natural" food can be bad for you, and processed food good. It is just a heuristic that works somewhat well when you have limited information.

quitit 5y ago

“Processed foods” is a catch all term for what is generally known as junk food - food that is nutritionally poor and often has unhealthy quantities of flavour-enhancing ingredients that are known to be a problem in excess such as saturated fats, salt, sugar etc. However being against a food for merely being “processed” is essential-oils level of pseudo-science. Frankly it’s baseless fear-mongering and entirely ignorant to the understanding of nutrition. These foods are being made by the same scientific community which decries the junk food - the same people whose view you support. There is no reason not to engage an artificially made food replacement which is both sufficiently enjoyable and nutritious. This especially so when they address the significant issues of food-supply contributions to water scarcity, climate change and antibiotic resistance. Artificially grown meat will also be better for you - not just nutritionally but also because it doesn’t fall victim to the weaknesses in the food supply industry (disease/food poisoning/contamination.) Also “everyone munches on it like strawberries” - the foods in question are either still in development or low supply. There is a lot of strawman going on here.

hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
I find the first two sentences of your post incoherent. If, as you say, processed food equals junk food, being against it doesn't seem pseud-science to me. You probably meant the term "processed foods" is being used imprecisely to mean "junk food" which is true: the large set of processed foods contains both junk food as well as other kinds of food, some of them being processed by their very nature (like cheese - you can't have "unprocessed cheese"). I wish people stopped using the imprecise phrase "processed foods" and concentrate on the overall effect on one's health. Because singling out any particular component will get you false negatives. Olive oil - high in calories. Feta cheese - high in sodium (and yet, it has an overall good effect on one's cardiac health). Red wine - bad because of alcohol. It's only when you look at the whole you can make a meaningful decision. Yes, it's more difficult and people prefer simple decisions. But your health is worth it.
- quitit 5y ago
  The comprehension issue at hand is that you’ve ignored the quotation marks around “processed foods”, thus you’ve lost the reference to the parent comment which the statement was in reply to. However you have come good and realised that I was indeed taking issue with the words being used as an improper stand-in for foods which merely have poor nutritional content.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

pessimizer 5y ago

Artificial meat is the most important thing anyone could be working on right now. Convincing, nutritious, cheap artificial meat could turn the world vegetarian. This would have radical effects on the environment, the climate, and obviate the need to kill billions of animals every year. "don't eat hyper processed foods" is a horseshit shorthand. It's types of processing that are problems, not the simple fact that food has been prepared. Sometimes I'll cook a dish with a lot of steps at home; am I supposed to assume that the 10-step food I cook at home is less healthy than the 2-step? > eat moderately This literally doesn't mean anything. Moderate is not an amount, or a composition.

GhettoComputers 5y ago
No it won’t. Tofu has existed for centuries and it didn’t, impossible burgers didn’t. It’s hopeful, but in reality it’ll just give industrialized countries with poorer people less access to animal products, while those in 3rd world countries continue to grow chickens.
- Zababa 5y ago
  Neither tofu nor impossible burgers are a convincing replacement of a real piece of meat. They are replacement for processed meat.
  - GhettoComputers 5y ago
    Sure, neither of them are ribeye equivalents. But at what cost will people pay for the the fake foods, and what issues will they bring? I'm actually very fond of quorn (with egg white) which I could be convinced is a 1:1 piece of chicken.
debacle 5y ago
> Convincing, nutritious, cheap artificial meat could turn the world vegetarian. Which part of the world? The US? Eastern Europe? South America? The barrier to "convincing" and "cheap" are very high.

lr4444lr 5y ago

I like the sentiment, but I'm an unrepentant "animal flesh once a day" on most days kinda guy, and various health markers all point to that working well for me. The real issue to me is the branding: too many people think that just because a fancy label touts locally sourced organic whatnot that the product is automatically healthier than store-branded simple foods.

liveoneggs 5y ago

yeah but what if you take those lentils (or split peas), grind them into a powder, add tons of salt, color them with brown stuff, add juice to simulate blood, and then glue them into the shape of a hamburger?

herbst 5y ago

I like Quorn, I've eaten some nice tofu and really good saitan. I really like black bean burgers too. However every single actual fake meat I tried so far was sitting wrong in my stomach. Maybe one gets used to it, who knows. The whole topic is also skewed. In Switzerland 2/3 of the land are basically non useable. This land is only used to feed cows, which makes up 95% of the diet of a organic local cow. There is no way we could grow anything useful on this land, especially not without destroying the nature.

Balero 5y ago
You could argue that instead of using that land for grazing, it should be allowed to go wild again, helping to improve the nature. It is still usable by other species than humans and cattle. This would likely change the landscape and make the countryside look different. So there is a question about whether you want to change back to the 'original natural' landscape, or keep the cow managed 'agricultural-natural' landscape. There is a a similar discussion happening in the UK about re-wilding some moorland, should it be kept in it's current tree-less state, for grouse shooting and not particularly economical sheep grazing, or be reverted to a 'pre-human' state of forest. Only it has been the moorland for hundreds and hundreds of years, and it would actually take some intervention in some places to change to a forest due to the grazing by deer and lack of predators (due to humans killing them all). Personally I think there is room for both keeping some, and letting/helping some go wild.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

Meat tastes good. I want to keep eating it.

TheCondor 5y ago
We bought a half cattle from a local organic farmer. It’s not ultra green, but there was no fertilizer and fairly minimal transport carbon. And it keeps the money local. We are a family of four and I fully expect it to last 18+ months, pretty easily. Additionally, you can get it aged if you work with the processor. It was a very interesting experience, we learned a lot and will do it again. Check out eatwild.com to find a rancher near you.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  Sounds interesting. I will check that out. Thanks.
phonypc 5y ago
If you knew human flesh to be the most tasty substance on Earth, would you want to keep eating it? (No, obviously eating people is not equivalent on all levels to eating non-human animals. But merely tasting good isn't a very sensible reason to eat something on its own)
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  I can find non-human animal meat for sale at the grocery store.
  - ben_w 5y ago
    That’s not relevant to the question asked. For some people, meat is a moral issue that makes the literal holocaust look like a one-off homicide, and must be utterly eliminated. (Personally, given what I believe about the nature of minds, I suspect the moral issue varies by species; but the number of dead is that order of magnitude). Other people believe it to be a mere personal health issue, which is basically just “you do you, none of my business”. Other people say the environmental consequences of meat production affect us all, and therefore needs to be minimised: here, if everyone wants it but only the super-rich can afford it, that’s still a win.

lqet 5y ago

I have mentioned this several times in comments on other threads, and each time my comment was buried under variations of the same argument: the vast majority of people cannot be expected to give up meat, and therefore to help both the environment and their health, and to stop killing animals, we should offer them artificial meat. But I very much doubt that the additional crazy overhead of producing and packing and shipping this artificial meat (which as you said is completely unnecessary, as you can just start eating non-hyper-processed vegetables) will result in a net benefit for the planet, or for your personal health. Another thing that concerns me is the centralization aspect. It is still fairly easy to buy meat coming from your local butcher / local animals. Looking at the ingredients of some of this artificial meat, I fail to see how it should be produced by a local shop. You need a supply chain, and possibly special machinery. This may only be carried out by large companies.

windexh8er 5y ago
Most of the "real" processed meat has more overhead than its counterparts. Most people do not buy from a local butcher, to imply otherwise is turning a blind eye. They buy big brand overly processed "meat" that comes in a cardboard box wrapped in plastic just the same. With respect to "crazy overhead" animals require land, food and water at an exponential rate of consumption compared to alternatives. They also taint and pollute groundwater sources and contribute to a significant amount of food recalls due to the above. Lastly in the metro I live there are about a half dozen alt meat "butcher" shops that supply alt meats to consumers and local restaurants. They're insanely popular and have been for over 5 years now. There's great brand recognition of those alt meats on local menus. You don't often see that with "real" meat because there's not as much differentiation in the product in real meats, just price. A lot of the above points are simply ignoring facts and the market. Hopefully, like with EVs, more people can continue to make positive progress and acceptance with alternatives to real meats as we've been seeing.
- lqet 5y ago
  > With respect to "crazy overhead" animals require land, food and water at an exponential rate of consumption compared to alternatives. Why is the overhead exponential in the rate of consumption?

windexh8er 5y ago

> ...and the moment someone invents artificial meat everybody loses their fucking mind and munch on it like strawberries. This is not exclusively a bad thing as is implied. For some it will be their endgame, but for others it will be a transition. In our household veggie "burgers" are more common than fake/alt meats. But fake meats have largely displaced the real thing. For example a commonly requested menu item is buffalo chicken dip. The family simply refers to it as "fake chicken dip" and that's been normalized over the last few years. We've transitioned from smoking, grilling, sous vide and other methods of traditional meat cooking multiple times a week to a request once or twice a month for real bacon and around the holidays a brined and smoked turkey breast. Fish is another story, nobody's giving up sushi anytime soon. But overall we enjoy it, and it's a net positive in many other ways. We've served other family members homemade burgers (not preformed) using off the shelf alt "hamburger meat" and they've taken to making them in their homes after enjoying them. In many ways there's not much health gain currently, but - again it's a great transitory step for many.

GhettoComputers 5y ago
It’s more expensive, less healthy, and relies on tricking people they’re eating a more nutritious food than they are, who benefits aside from corporations? If you told people which is real and fake, you think it’ll still be wanted?

globular-toast 5y ago

"Processed" actually has a specific meaning, though. It generally refers to the addition of some kind of salt or smoking. So cured meats, sausages, bacon etc. These are processed foods. It doesn't generally mean stuff that isn't "natural". Do you really think meat from factory farms is "natural" anyway?

kcplate 5y ago

Feel free to grow my meat in a lab, as long as that lab is full of living cows, chickens, turkey, deer, pigs, lambs, and fish.